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
H.K. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/73232)<\/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
G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL<\/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
H.K.<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Selma A\u011eAR TUN\u00c7<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, haks\u0131z yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbirlerine karar verilmesi nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada h\u00fckmedilen tazminat\u0131n yetersiz olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 elkoyma i\u015flemi nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada tazminat talebinin incelenmemesi nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi isnad\u0131yla soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda 3\/8\/2016 tarihinden itibaren 2 g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri uygulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun evinde gecikmesinde sak\u0131nca bulunan h\u00e2l bulundu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla gece vakti arama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, dijital materyallerine ve cep telefonuna el konmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kamama adli kontrol tedbiri uygulanarak 5\/8\/2016 tarihinde sal\u0131verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Konya 8. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan beraat etmi\u015f ayr\u0131ca cep telefonu, bilgisayar gibi elektronik e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n iadesine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Beraat karar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fmesi sonras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu, 21\/10\/2021 tarihli dilek\u00e7eyle 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun 141. maddesi uyar\u0131nca koruma tedbiri nedeniyle tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu evinde usuls\u00fcz ve hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak arama yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve dijital materyallerine ve cep telefonuna hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 ve usuls\u00fcz olarak el konuldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucu, somut delil olmadan, yasal haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmadan, haks\u0131z olarak yakalan\u0131p g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu dilek\u00e7esinin talep k\u0131sm\u0131nda, hakk\u0131nda haks\u0131z olarak uygulanan yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131, elkoyma tedbirleri ile arama i\u015flemi nedeniyle-miktar belirtmeden- maddi tazminat ile 100.000 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n \u00f6denmesini talep etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ere\u011fli A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi (A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi) 26\/11\/2021 tarihinde ba\u015fvurucunun haks\u0131z g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 2 g\u00fcnl\u00fck s\u00fcre i\u00e7in 86,73 TL maddi, 150 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n \u00f6denmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu dilek\u00e7esinde, yaln\u0131zca haks\u0131z yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbirleri nedeniyle tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verildi\u011fini, haks\u0131z ve \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz arama i\u015flemine, elkoyma tedbirine ve yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kamama adli kontrol tedbirine y\u00f6nelik de tazminat talebinde bulunmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen bu talepler hakk\u0131nda bir karar verilmedi\u011fini ve haks\u0131z yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri nedeniyle \u00f6denen tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n da yetersiz oldu\u011funu belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Konya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 2. Ceza Dairesi (B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi) 20\/1\/2022 tarihinde karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7enin ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
” … <\/p>\n
1-Davac\u0131n\u0131n, davac\u0131n\u0131n silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan g\u00f6zalt\u0131na al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu su\u00e7tan yarg\u0131lanmas\u0131 neticesinde beraat etti\u011fini beyan ederek tazminat talebinde bulundu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmakla, davac\u0131n\u0131n yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 mahkemeye yeniden m\u00fczekkere yaz\u0131larak, silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan verilen beraat karar\u0131n\u0131n kesinle\u015fip kesinle\u015fmedi\u011finin ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131larak, buna ili\u015fkin belgelerin de (gerek\u00e7eli karar, kesinle\u015fme \u015ferhi vs) getirtilerek sonucuna karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fi g\u00f6zetilmeksizin eksik ara\u015ft\u0131rma ile h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmas\u0131,<\/p>\n
2-Davac\u0131n\u0131n 03\/08\/2016-05\/08\/2016 tarihleri aras\u0131nda g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterir yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131na alma tedbirlerine ili\u015fkin belgelerin denetime olanak verecek \u015fekilde dosya i\u00e7erisinde bulundurulmamas\u0131,<\/p>\n
3-Davac\u0131n\u0131n Ere\u011fli (Konya) \u0130l\u00e7e Devlet Hastanesinde Acil T\u0131p Teknisyeni olarak g\u00f6rev yapmakta iken ilk olarak g\u00f6revinden uzakla\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, sonras\u0131nda resmi gazetede yay\u0131mlanan KHK ile kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmesine ra\u011fmen bu hususa ili\u015fkin herhangi bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n anla\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda; maddi tazminat\u0131n hesaplanmas\u0131nda davac\u0131n\u0131n kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarih ile tahliye(sal\u0131verilme) tarihi aras\u0131nda ge\u00e7en s\u00fcrenin esas al\u0131naca\u011f\u0131, yine maddi tazminata ili\u015fkin faiz ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7 tarihinin ihra\u00e7 tarihi olaca\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmak suretiyle, davac\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 kuruma m\u00fczekkere yaz\u0131larak davac\u0131n\u0131n kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131l\u0131p \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ise hangi tarihte \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, g\u00f6revine iade edilip edilmedi\u011fi sorularak hangi tarihte kamu g\u00f6revinden \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 kesin olarak tespitinin yap\u0131l\u0131p sonucuna g\u00f6re maddi tazminat\u0131n belirlenmesi gerekti\u011finin g\u00f6zetilmemesi,<\/p>\n
…”<\/p>\n
8. Bozma \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamada A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi 9\/3\/2022 tarihinde cep telefonu ve elektronik e\u015fyalar\u0131n beraat karar\u0131 sonras\u0131nda iadesine karar verilmekle maddi tazminat talebinin reddine, haks\u0131z yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri nedeniyle 200 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvurucu istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu dilek\u00e7esinde, \u00f6nceki istinaf ba\u015fvurusundaki iddialar\u0131 yeniden dile getirmi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 26\/5\/2022 tarihinde 200 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n 500 TL olarak d\u00fczeltilmesi sonras\u0131nda istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun esastan reddine kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu, istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun reddi karar\u0131n\u0131 6\/6\/2022 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendi\u011fini bildirmi\u015f olup 27\/6\/\/2022 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
11. 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\u0131na karar 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
12. Ba\u015fvurucu, haks\u0131z olarak ve yasal haklar\u0131 hat\u0131rlat\u0131lmadan, somut delil olmadan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri uygulanmas\u0131 ve bu tedbir sebebiyle h\u00fckmedilen tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n yetersiz olmas\u0131 nedenleriyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve masumiyet karinesinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucunun maddi tazminata ili\u015fkin bir iddias\u0131 bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
13. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan; uygulanan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan su\u00e7 i\u015fledi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde somut \u015f\u00fcphe bulunmas\u0131yla ilgili olarak adli makamlar\u0131n de\u011ferlendirmesinin g\u00f6zetilmesini, tedbirin soru\u015fturman\u0131n y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi ve maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131 gibi me\u015fru ama\u00e7lar\u0131 bulundu\u011funun g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurularak de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
14. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olaylar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucular taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmay\u0131p olay ve olgular\u0131n hukuki tavsifini kendisi takdir eder. 3\/8\/2016 ile 5\/8\/2016 tarihleri aras\u0131nda \u00fc\u00e7 g\u00fcn g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda kalan ba\u015fvurucunun, ba\u015fvuru formunda uygulanan g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbirinin salt iki (2) g\u00fcnl\u00fck k\u0131sm\u0131 nedeniyle h\u00fckmedilen tazminat\u0131n yetersizli\u011finden yak\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lmakla, \u015fik\u00e2yetinin Anayasa’n\u0131n 19. maddesinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ve dokuzuncu f\u0131kralar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
15. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin bu iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
16. Anayasa Mahkemesi G\u00fclseren \u00c7\u0131tak ([GK], B. No: 2020\/1554, 27\/4\/2023) karar\u0131yla i\u00e7tihat de\u011fi\u015fikli\u011fine gitmi\u015f, haklar\u0131nda kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya beraat karar\u0131 verilenlerin 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 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 h\u00e2le geldi\u011finin kabul edildi\u011fini, 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\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmi\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 36-38).<\/p>\n
17. Somut ba\u015fvuruda da 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. [2.B.], B. No: 2018\/696, 9\/5\/2019, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
18. Yarg\u0131 mercilerinin tazminat i\u00e7in somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\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 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\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirirken somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekir (M.E., \u00a7 48).<\/p>\n
19. Bunun yan\u0131nda manevi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n yeterli olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirlenirken tazminata karar veren yarg\u0131 merciinin karar tarihinde Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer ba\u015fvurular \u00fczerine verdi\u011fi veya verebilece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re bir kar\u015f\u0131la\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lacakt\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesince yakalama, g\u00f6zalt\u0131 veya tutuklaman\u0131n hukuki olmamas\u0131 nedeniyle manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilirken ki\u015finin sosyal ve ekonomik durumu, mesleki ve toplumsal konumu, \u00fczerine at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7un niteli\u011fi, koruma tedbirine neden olan olay\u0131n cereyan tarz\u0131, tedbirin ki\u015finin \u00fczerinde b\u0131rakt\u0131\u011f\u0131 olumsuz etkiler ve tedbirin s\u00fcresi, tedbir nedeniyle meydana gelen ihlalin a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nmaktad\u0131r (bkz. Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu [GK] B. No: 2018\/11489, 11\/1\/2024,\u00a7 35).<\/p>\n
20. Somut ba\u015fvuruya konu tazminat davas\u0131n\u0131 inceleyen A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi beraat karar\u0131yla sona eren yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun iki g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131nda tutulmas\u0131 nedeniyle 200 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine h\u00fckmetmi\u015f, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi de tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131 500 TL olarak belirlemi\u015ftir. Bu miktar\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda \u00f6denmesine h\u00fckmetti\u011fi ya da h\u00fckmedebilece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131na g\u00f6re d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck oldu\u011fu ortadad\u0131r (Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbirinin hukukili\u011fi ile ilgili iddialarda bir g\u00fcnl\u00fck g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcresi i\u00e7in h\u00fckmetti\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131 yarg\u0131 merciinin karar tarihi olan 2022 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in g\u00fcnl\u00fck asgari 1.350 TL, 2025 y\u0131l\u0131 i\u00e7in ise g\u00fcnl\u00fck asgari 3.330 TL’dir) Anayasa Mahkemesinin benzer durumlarda verilmesine h\u00fckmetti\u011fi veya h\u00fckmedebilece\u011fi tazminat miktar\u0131yla ayn\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekmemekle birlikte tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n somut olay\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131nda tazminat hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fc zay\u0131flatacak kadar d\u00fc\u015f\u00fck oldu\u011fu sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
21. 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. Hukuka Ayk\u0131r\u0131 Elkoyma Karar\u0131 Nedeniyle \u00d6zel Hayata Sayg\u0131 Hakk\u0131 ile Ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 Olarak Etkili Ba\u015fvuru Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
22. Ba\u015fvurucu haks\u0131z elkoyma tedbiri uygulanmas\u0131 nedeniyle tazminat talep edilmesine ra\u011fmen A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi karar\u0131nda bu talebi hakk\u0131nda bir gerek\u00e7e bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden olan gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
23. Anayasa Mahkemesi Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu ba\u015fvurusunda somut ba\u015fvurudakine benzer \u015fekilde elkoyma tedbirinin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir \u015fekilde uyguland\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrerek 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 141. maddesi uyar\u0131nca a\u00e7\u0131lan tazminat davas\u0131nda mahkemece bu talebe ili\u015fkin bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin iddiay\u0131 \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ve haberle\u015fme h\u00fcrriyetiyle ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelemi\u015ftir (Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu, \u00a7 42). Bu nedenle, ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131 da, iddialar\u0131n kapsam\u0131 g\u00f6zetilerek, \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenecektir.<\/p>\n
24. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir neden de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
25. Anayasa Mahkemesi Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu karar\u0131nda, ba\u015fvurucunun cep telefonuna elkonulmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin tedbirinin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin iddias\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan mahkemece bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n ve bu talep y\u00f6n\u00fcnden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurulmamas\u0131n\u0131n ba\u015fvurucunun ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n etkili bir \u015fekilde incelenmesine imk\u00e2n sa\u011flanmam\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ve haberle\u015fme h\u00fcrriyetiyle ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir (Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
26. Benzer iddiaya ili\u015fkin ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan da Siyami H\u0131d\u0131ro\u011flu karar\u0131nda ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektirecek bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Bu bak\u0131mdan, ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131na konu iddia a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan da \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
27. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesiyle ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak 40. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
28. Ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131 ile \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden iletti\u011fi \u015fikayetlerin incelenmesine gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
C. Di\u011fer \u0130hlal \u0130ddialar\u0131<\/p>\n
29. Ba\u015fvurucunun haks\u0131z olarak yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kamama adli kontrol tedbiri uygulanmas\u0131 nedeniyle seyahat h\u00fcrriyetinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddias\u0131n\u0131n Sebahat Tuncel ([1.B.] B. No: 2012\/1051, 20\/2\/2014, \u00a7\u00a7 41-55) karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda konu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yetkisizlik nedeniyle; hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 arama i\u015flemi nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ve konut dokunulmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddias\u0131n\u0131n Mehmet Cengiz ve R\u0131dvan Cengiz ([2.B.] B. No: 2019\/21704, 20\/9\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 28-31) karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
30. Ba\u015fvurucu ihlalin tespiti ve 2.500 TL maddi, 100.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesi talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
31. Somut ba\u015fvurudaki hak ihlallerinin mahkeme karar\u0131ndan kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu nedenle ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen s\u00f6z konusu hak ihlallerinin 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) [1.B.], 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
32. \u0130hlallerin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan tazminat taleplerinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. Kamuya a\u00e7\u0131k belgelerde ba\u015fvurucunun kimli\u011finin gizli tutulmas\u0131 talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. 1. Ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 elkoyma karar\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
3. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik kriterlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
C. 1. 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
2. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesi ile g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 40. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin hak ihlallerinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Konya B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 2. Ceza Dairesine (E.2022\/647, K.2022\/762) iletilmesi i\u00e7in Ere\u011fli A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2022\/66, K.2022\/77) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Tazminata ili\u015fkin di\u011fer taleplerin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. \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
H. 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 2022\/73232 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 H.K. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2022\/73232) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 22\/1\/2025 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL \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 : H.K. Vekili : Av. Selma A\u011eAR TUN\u00c7 \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, haks\u0131z yakalama ve g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbirlerine karar verilmesi nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada h\u00fckmedilen tazminat\u0131n yetersiz olmas\u0131 nedeniyle ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n, hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 elkoyma i\u015flemi nedeniyle a\u00e7\u0131lan davada tazminat talebinin incelenmemesi nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131yla ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 olarak etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi isnad\u0131yla soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu soru\u015fturma kapsam\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda 3\/8\/2016 tarihinden itibaren 2 g\u00fcn s\u00fcreyle g\u00f6zalt\u0131 tedbiri uygulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun evinde gecikmesinde sak\u0131nca bulunan h\u00e2l bulundu\u011fu iddias\u0131yla gece vakti arama yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, dijital materyallerine ve cep telefonuna el konmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda yurt d\u0131\u015f\u0131na \u00e7\u0131kamama adli kontrol tedbiri uygulanarak 5\/8\/2016 tarihinde sal\u0131verilmi\u015ftir. 3. Konya 8. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonucunda ba\u015fvurucu m\u00fcsnet su\u00e7tan beraat etmi\u015f ayr\u0131ca cep telefonu, bilgisayar gibi elektronik e\u015fyalar\u0131n\u0131n iadesine karar verilmi\u015ftir. …<\/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-36498","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n