T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
G. G. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/51671)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 22\/1\/2025<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Kenan YA\u015eAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00d6mer \u00c7INAR<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ayd\u0131n DEM\u0130REL<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Emre AKARYILDIZ<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru; hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada \u00f6denen tazminat\u0131n yetersiz olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 arama karar\u0131ndan kaynakl\u0131 zarar\u0131n tazmin edilmemesi sebebiyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 ve konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ankara Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131) taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi isnad\u0131yla y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun evinde arama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu 1\/12\/2016-5\/12\/2016 tarihleri aras\u0131nda be\u015f g\u00fcn ve 26\/1\/2017-27\/1\/2017 tarihleri aras\u0131nda iki g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda kalm\u0131\u015f, her iki g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcreci sonras\u0131nda da serbest b\u0131rak\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. M\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Ankara 15. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi 10\/7\/2018 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun beraatine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Beraat karar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesi sonras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu iki farkl\u0131 tarihte evinde haks\u0131z olarak arama yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ayr\u0131ca hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak iki kez yakalan\u0131p g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ayr\u0131ca haks\u0131z elkoyma tedbiri uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 141. maddesi uyar\u0131nca tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu 1.500 TL maddi, 75.000 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n \u00f6denmesini talep etmi\u015ftir. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde araman\u0131n \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fine dair bir iddia bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
5. Ankara Bat\u0131 4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi) 5\/12\/2019 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun maddi ve manevi tazminat taleplerinin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fc ile haks\u0131z yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri uygulanmas\u0131 nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucuya 325,18 TL maddi, 1.000 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n \u00f6denmesine karar vermi\u015ftir. 4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi “… silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi su\u00e7u isnad\u0131yla 01\/12\/2016-05\/12\/2016 tarihleri aras\u0131nda 5 g\u00fcn, 26\/01\/2017-27\/01\/2017 tarihleri aras\u0131nda 2 g\u00fcn olmak \u00fczere toplam 7 g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, ilk g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u015fleminin sonunda adli kontrol talebiyle sevk edildi\u011fi Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fince adli kontrol karar\u0131 ile serbest kald\u0131\u011f\u0131, ikinci g\u00f6zalt\u0131 i\u015flemi sonucunda ise emniyetten serbest b\u0131rak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Ankara 15. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi’nin… karar\u0131 ile davac\u0131 hakk\u0131nda ‘Beraat’ verildi\u011fi, karar\u0131n … kesinle\u015fti\u011fi, bu nedenle davac\u0131n\u0131n haks\u0131z yere g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n sabit oldu\u011fu, … davac\u0131n\u0131n … maddi tazminat olarak g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda ge\u00e7irdi\u011fi s\u00fcrelerde mahrum kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 kazan\u00e7 kayb\u0131n\u0131 talep etti\u011fi, … g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131n\u0131p … d\u00f6nemde g\u00fcndelik i\u015flerde yevmiyeli olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131, dosyaya davac\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nmadan \u00f6ncesine ait gelirini g\u00f6sterir herhangi bir belge ve SGK kayd\u0131n\u0131n ibraz edilmedi\u011fi, bu itibarla kazan\u00e7 kayb\u0131n\u0131n 2016 ve 2017 y\u0131l\u0131 asgari \u00fccretin net tutar\u0131n\u0131n esas al\u0131narak hesaplanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilerek, Mahkememizce … h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nan bilirki\u015fi ek raporunda … 325,18 TL maddi tazminat\u0131n… \u00f6denmesi,…” gerek\u00e7esine dayanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu ve daval\u0131 Maliye Hazinesi karara kar\u015f\u0131 istinaf ba\u015fvurusunda bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu istinaf ba\u015fvuru dilek\u00e7esinde, h\u00fckmedilen tazminat miktarlar\u0131n\u0131n yetersiz oldu\u011funu ayr\u0131ca haks\u0131z arama ve elkoyma i\u015flemleri nedeniyle de tazminat talep etmesine ra\u011fmen 4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince bu talepleri hakk\u0131nda bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bu y\u00fczden adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden olan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucu yap\u0131lan araman\u0131n \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz oldu\u011funu dile getirmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. \u0130stinaf kanun yolu ba\u015fvurusu Ankara B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 12. Ceza Dairesi (B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi) taraf\u0131ndan 27\/10\/2021 tarihinde d\u00fczeltilerek esastan reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
“… <\/p>\n
Haks\u0131z arama ve el koyma i\u015flemleri yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131na dayal\u0131 talebin manevi tazminat kapsam\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde de\u011ferlendirilmemesinde bir isabetsizlik g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
…<\/p>\n
… her bir d\u00f6nem i\u00e7in ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 (net asgari \u00fccret \u00fczerinden) maddi ve manevi tazminat takdiri ile faiz ba\u015flang\u0131c\u0131n\u0131n da buna g\u00f6re belirlenmesi gerekirken, an\u0131lan s\u00fcrenin tamam\u0131 \u00fczerinden, \u00fcstelik hatal\u0131 hesaplama i\u00e7eren bilirki\u015fi raporuna itibarla tek bir maddi ve manevi tazminata h\u00fckmolunmas\u0131 … 325,18 TL maddi tazminat\u0131n g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tarihi olan 01\/12\/2016 tarihinden itibaren ibaresinin \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lmas\u0131 ve yerine 216,83 TL. maddi tazminat\u0131n 01\/12\/2016 tarihinden itibaren, 93,60 TL. maddi tazminat\u0131n da 26\/01\/2017 tarihinden itibaren ibaresinin yaz\u0131lmas\u0131; 1000 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tarihi olan 1\/12\/2016 tarihinden itibaren ibaresinin \u00e7\u0131kart\u0131lmas\u0131 ve yerine 400,00 TL. manevi tazminat\u0131n 1\/12\/2016 tarihinden itibaren, 200,00 TL. manevi tazminat\u0131n da 26\/1\/2017 tarihinden itibaren ibaresinin yaz\u0131lmas\u0131 sureti ile… “<\/p>\n
8. Nihai karar ba\u015fvurucuya 8\/11\/2021 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucu 12\/11\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
9. Komisyonca ba\u015fvurucunun adli yard\u0131m talebinin kabul\u00fcne, yarg\u0131lama giderlerini \u00f6demekten ge\u00e7ici olarak muaf tutulmas\u0131na ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131nakarar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
A. Ki\u015fi H\u00fcrriyeti ve G\u00fcvenli\u011fi Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia <\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu; hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak yakalanmas\u0131 ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda tutulmas\u0131 nedeniyle h\u00fckmedilen maddi ve manevi tazminat\u0131n yeterli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) bu iddia bak\u0131m\u0131ndan sundu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, ba\u015fvurunun kanun yolu \u015fikayeti niteli\u011finde olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucu lehine tazminata h\u00fckmedilmi\u015f olmakla ba\u015fvurucunun ma\u011fdur s\u0131fat\u0131n\u0131n devam edip etmedi\u011finin ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinde g\u00f6zetilmesi gerekti\u011fini, ba\u015fvurunun esas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ise A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince ihlal tespiti yap\u0131larak tazminata h\u00fckmedildi\u011finin de\u011ferlendirmede dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini bildirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
11. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmay\u0131p kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
12. Anayasa Mahkemesi G\u00fclseren \u00c7\u0131tak ([G.K.], B.No:2020\/1554, 27\/4\/2023) karar\u0131yla haklar\u0131nda kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya beraat karar\u0131 verilenlerin 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 141. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat yolunu t\u00fckettikten sonra yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 veya tutuklaman\u0131n hukuki olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve \u00f6denen tazminat\u0131n yetersiz oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla yapt\u0131klar\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvurularda ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmi\u015f kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in yaln\u0131zca 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (e) bendi kapsam\u0131nda bir tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olaca\u011f\u0131 sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Zira bu h\u00fck\u00fcmle yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 ve tutuklaman\u0131n daha sonra verilen kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya beraat karar\u0131yla hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 hale geldi\u011finin kabul edildi\u011fi, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla 141. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (e) bendi uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat davalar\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir. Bu \u00e7er\u00e7evede bu bent kapsam\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davalarda hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k kanun gere\u011fince kabul edildi\u011finden a\u011f\u0131r ceza mahkemesince bu bende dayan\u0131larak tazminat \u00f6denmesi durumunda Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda yap\u0131lacak inceleme tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirlemekle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olacakt\u0131r (G\u00fclseren \u00c7\u0131tak, \u00a7\u00a7 36-39).<\/p>\n
13. Somut ba\u015fvuruda, A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan ihlal tespiti yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve bir miktar tazminata h\u00fckmedilmi\u015f olmakla ba\u015fvuruda yap\u0131lacak inceleme h\u00fckmedilen tazminat miktarlar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirlemekle s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olacakt\u0131r (M.E., B. No: 2018\/696, 9\/5\/2019, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
14. Bu ba\u011flamda yarg\u0131 mercilerinin tazminat i\u00e7in somut olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131na g\u00f6re takdir yetkisi bulunmakla birlikte meydana gelen ihlalle orant\u0131l\u0131 olmayan \u00f6nemsiz miktarda bir tazminat Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 olacakt\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan tazminat miktar\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer davalarda verdi\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re kayda de\u011fer \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmamal\u0131d\u0131r. Bununla birlikte h\u00fckmedilen miktar\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda verilmesine h\u00fckmetti\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131ndan belirli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck olmas\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmez. Tazminat\u0131n Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131yla uyumlu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilirken somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir (M.E., \u00a7 48).<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucunun maddi tazminat talebiyle ilgili olarak A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi bilirki\u015fi raporunda ilgili y\u0131l asgari \u00fccreti uyar\u0131nca yap\u0131lan hesaplama sonucu ba\u015fvurucunun hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri nedeniyle mahrum kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 tutar olarak hesaplanan miktarda maddi tazminata h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi de kararda h\u00fckmedilen miktar\u0131 d\u00fczelterek onam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu veriler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda belirlenen maddi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131nda orant\u0131s\u0131z oldu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemeyecektir.<\/p>\n
16. Somut ba\u015fvuruya konu tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131 inceleyen A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi’nin beraat karar\u0131yla sona eren yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun yedi g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda tutulmas\u0131 nedeniyle 1.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince bu miktar toplam600 TL olarak d\u00fczeltilmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince \u00f6denmesine karar verilen manevi tazminat miktar\u0131 somut olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131nda ve manevi tazminat\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkin yukar\u0131da belirtilen kriterler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde -tazminata karar veren yarg\u0131 merciinin karar verdi\u011fi tarih itibar\u0131yla- Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda \u00f6denmesine karar verdi\u011fi veya verebilece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re d\u00fc\u015f\u00fckt\u00fcr (Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6zalt\u0131n\u0131n hukukili\u011fi ile ilgili iddialarda bir g\u00fcnl\u00fck g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7in \u00f6denmesine karar verdi\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131 yarg\u0131 merciinin karar tarihi olan 2021 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in asgari 800 TL, 2025 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in ise 3.330 TL\u2019dir). B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince h\u00fckmedilen tazminat\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda verilmesine h\u00fckmetti\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131yla ayn\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmemekle birlikte somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131nda \u00f6denmesine h\u00fckmedilen miktar\u0131n d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
17. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle, Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. \u00d6zel Hayata Sayg\u0131 Ve Konut Dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Haklar\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
18. Ba\u015fvurucu; haks\u0131z olarak evinde iki kez arama yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131n belirlenecek tazminat\u0131n miktar\u0131n\u0131 dolay\u0131s\u0131yla yarg\u0131laman\u0131n sonucunu etkileyecek bir husus olmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen mahkemece de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fini belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden olan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bakanl\u0131k bu iddia bak\u0131m\u0131ndan sundu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde, yarg\u0131 mercilerinin kararlar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7elerine de\u011finerek bu gerek\u00e7elerin yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirmede dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini bildirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucunun bu iddialar\u0131 \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 ile konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenecektir.<\/p>\n
20. Anayasa Mahkemesi Mehmet Cengiz ve R\u0131dvan Cengiz karar\u0131nda, arama i\u015fleminin hukuki olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 ile konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat yolunun ayn\u0131 maddenin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (i) bendi uyar\u0131nca hakk\u0131ndaki arama karar\u0131 \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz bir \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen ki\u015filere tan\u0131nan bir yol oldu\u011funu, ilgili Yarg\u0131tay karar\u0131na da de\u011finerek, belirtmi\u015ftir. Bu kararda, s\u00f6z konusu tazminat yolunun Anayasa Mahkemesine ba\u015fvurmadan \u00f6nce t\u00fcketilmesi gereken etkili bir ba\u015fvuru yolu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifade edilmi\u015f ve hukuka uygun olmayan arama karar\u0131na dayal\u0131 ihlal iddialar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucular hakk\u0131nda y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 sonras\u0131nda yap\u0131lan bireysel ba\u015fvuruda incelenmi\u015ftir (Mehmet Cengiz ve R\u0131dvan Cengiz, B. No: 2019\/21704, 20\/9\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 28-31, 65).<\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131nda s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemezlik durumunun s\u00f6z konusu olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesi gerekir. 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun\u2019un 47. maddesinin (5) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 ile Anayasa Mahkemesi \u0130\u00e7t\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’n\u00fcn 64. maddesinin (1) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 gere\u011fi bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketildi\u011fi, ba\u015fvuru yolu \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015f ise ihlalin \u00f6\u011frenildi\u011fi tarihten itibaren otuz g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekir. Bu sadece ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetleri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan makul bir ba\u015far\u0131 \u015fans\u0131 sunabilecek ve bir \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm sa\u011flayabilecek nitelikte, kullan\u0131labilir ve etkili ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131na olanak sunar. Zira bir ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetlerine ili\u015fkin etkili bir telafi kabiliyetini haiz olmayan yollara uygunsuz veya hatal\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclebilecek ba\u015fvurular yapmas\u0131n\u0131n bireysel ba\u015fvuru s\u00fcresi \u00fczerinde herhangi bir etkisi olmayacakt\u0131r (S.K. [GK], B. No: 2018\/24280, 17\/3\/2021, \u00a7 48).<\/p>\n
22. Yukar\u0131da da ifade edildi\u011fi \u00fczere, 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat yolu arama karar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz \u015fekilde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesi nedeniyle u\u011fran\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilen zararlar\u0131n telafisine imk\u00e2n veren bir yol olup, arama tedbirinin hukuki olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle u\u011fran\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilen zararlar\u0131n telafisi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ise etkili bir ba\u015fvuru yolu de\u011fildir (Mehmet Cengiz ve R\u0131dvan Cengiz, \u00a7\u00a7 64, 65).<\/p>\n
23. Bu durumda, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 arama i\u015flemine ili\u015fkin \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine dair \u015fikayetlerin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131 ile birlikte ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclmesi halinde, arama i\u015flemine esas te\u015fkil eden isnada ili\u015fkin mahk\u00fbmiyetle sonu\u00e7lanan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda verilen nihai karar\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenilmesinden itibarenotuz g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. Arama i\u015flemine esas te\u015fkil eden isnada ili\u015fkin soru\u015fturma sonucunda kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ya da yarg\u0131lama neticesinde beraate karar verilmesi halinde ise s\u00f6z konusu bu yarg\u0131sal yollar neticesinde verilen nihai kararlar\u0131n \u00f6\u011frenilmesinden itibaren otuz g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunulmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
24. Bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ve etkili olmayan bir yarg\u0131sal yola ba\u015fvurulmas\u0131n\u0131n bireysel ba\u015fvuru s\u00fcresi \u00fczerinde herhangi bir etkisi olmayaca\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda somut ba\u015fvurudaki \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 ile konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 bulundu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilmektedir. Zira ba\u015fvurucu, hakk\u0131ndaki yarg\u0131lamakapsam\u0131nda verilen nihai karar\u0131n tebli\u011finden itibaren otuz g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde de\u011fil, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 arama i\u015flemi nedeniyle ya\u015fanan hak ihlali bak\u0131m\u0131ndan etkili bir giderim imk\u00e2n\u0131 sunmayan 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 141. maddesinde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclen tazminat yolunu t\u00fckettikten sonra bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
25. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle, ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
26. Ba\u015fvurucu ihlalin tespiti ve 75.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
27. Anayasa Mahkemesince yap\u0131lan inceleme sonucunda Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 19. maddesinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak ayn\u0131 maddenin dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bu nedenle ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen s\u00f6z konusu hak ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131nda hukuki yarar bulunmaktad\u0131r. Bu kapsamda karar\u0131n g\u00f6nderildi\u011fi yarg\u0131 mercilerince yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken i\u015f, yeniden yarg\u0131lama i\u015flemlerini ba\u015flatmak ve Anayasa Mahkemesini ihlal sonucuna ula\u015ft\u0131ran nedenleri gideren, ihlal karar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkelere uygun yeni bir karar vermektir (Mehmet Do\u011fan [GK], B. No: 2014\/8875, 7\/6\/2018, \u00a7\u00a7 54-60; Alig\u00fcl Alkaya ve di\u011ferleri (2), B. No: 2016\/12506, 7\/11\/2019, \u00a7\u00a7 53-60, 66; Kadri Enis Berbero\u011flu (3) [GK], B. No: 2020\/32949, 21\/1\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 93-100).<\/p>\n
28. \u0130hlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. 1. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131nKABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 ve konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin -\u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak- dokuzuncu f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131 ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in Ankara B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 12. Ceza Dairesine (E.2020\/264, K. 2021\/2940) iletilmek \u00fczere Ankara Bat\u0131 4. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2018\/33, K.2019\/564) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
G. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 22\/1\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 22\/1\/2025 tarihli ve 2021\/51671 ba\u015fvuru numaral\u0131 karar\u0131\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130 ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 G. G. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/51671) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 22\/1\/2025 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131ld\u0131z SEFER\u0130NO\u011eLU \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Ayd\u0131n DEM\u0130REL Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. Emre AKARYILDIZ \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru; hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada \u00f6denen tazminat\u0131n yetersiz olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 arama karar\u0131ndan kaynakl\u0131 zarar\u0131n tazmin edilmemesi sebebiyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 ve konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ankara Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131) taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi isnad\u0131yla y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun evinde arama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu 1\/12\/2016-5\/12\/2016 tarihleri aras\u0131nda be\u015f g\u00fcn ve 26\/1\/2017-27\/1\/2017 tarihleri aras\u0131nda iki g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda kalm\u0131\u015f, her iki g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcreci sonras\u0131nda da serbest b\u0131rak\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. M\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen yarg\u0131lama sonucunda Ankara 15. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi 10\/7\/2018 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun beraatine karar vermi\u015ftir. 4. Beraat karar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesi sonras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu iki farkl\u0131 tarihte evinde haks\u0131z olarak arama yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ayr\u0131ca hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak iki kez yakalan\u0131p g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ayr\u0131ca haks\u0131z elkoyma tedbiri uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-36496","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n