Olaylar<\/p>\n
Bankadan arad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtip kredi nedeniyle yap\u0131lan kesinti ve sigorta bedellerinin iade edilece\u011fini s\u00f6yleyerek hileli hareketlerle m\u00fc\u015ftekiden menfaat sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun nitelikli doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011finden bahisle cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle iddianame d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Gerek soru\u015fturma evresinde gerekse duru\u015fma devresinde ba\u015fvurucu; doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k eylemini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirenin kendisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bilakis F.S. taraf\u0131ndan doland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia ederek birtak\u0131m deliller toplanmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. Dava sonucunda mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7tan hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun istinaf talebi reddedilerek h\u00fck\u00fcm kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
\u0130ddialar<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu, ceza davas\u0131nda cezay\u0131 azaltabilecek ya da ortadan kald\u0131rabilecek olgular\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Mahkemenin De\u011ferlendirmesi<\/p>\n
Somut olayda mahkeme, m\u00fc\u015ftekinin para yat\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hesap bilgilerini ba\u015fvurucunun F.S. isimli arkada\u015f\u0131na verdi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik savunmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k \u201csan\u0131k savunmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7tan kurtulmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu\u201d \u015feklindeki gerek\u00e7e ile ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu, a\u015famalardaki beyanlar\u0131nda eylemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren ki\u015finin F.S. oldu\u011funu, F.S.nin kendisini de doland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f; F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu iddia etti\u011fi sosyal medya hesab\u0131n\u0131 ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine bildirmi\u015f, ayr\u0131ca kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n getirtilmesi gibi taleplerde bulunmu\u015ftur. Dahas\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu, duru\u015fmada s\u0131ras\u0131nda F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bir cep telefonu numaras\u0131n\u0131 da mahkemeye bildirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Bu delil ve talepler kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin kimlik ve adres bilgilerinin tespiti hususunda soru\u015fturma evresinde delillerin toplanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi h\u00e2lde Cumhuriyet ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan yeterli ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bunun yan\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun an\u0131lan hususlarda ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc talepler mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan soyut gerek\u00e7elerle reddedilmi\u015f ve ba\u015fvurucu, iddia makam\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda dezavantajl\u0131 duruma d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu ko\u015fullarda mahkemenin izledi\u011fi y\u00f6ntemin silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin gereklerine uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r.<\/p>\n
Anayasa Mahkemesi, a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
————-<\/p>\n
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
E\u015eREF B\u0130NG\u00d6L BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2021\/10332)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 18\/7\/2024<\/p>\n
R.G. Tarih ve Say\u0131: 3\/12\/2024-32741<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/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
R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7<\/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
Mustafa \u015eENOCAK<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
E\u015fref B\u0130NG\u00d6L<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Adnan \u0130HSANO\u011eLU<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, ceza davas\u0131nda cezay\u0131 azaltabilecek ya da ortadan kald\u0131rabilecek bir olgunun ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. \u0130stanbul Anadolu Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) hileli olarak menfaat sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015f, soru\u015fturma neticesinde ba\u015fvurucunun nitelikli doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011finden bahisle cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 11\/6\/2018 tarihinde iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. \u0130ddianamenin kabul\u00fc ile a\u00e7\u0131lan dava, \u0130stanbul Anadolu 9. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclmeye ba\u015flanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131lamada 2\/7\/2018 tarihinde duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Duru\u015fma iki celsede bitirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucu; birinci celsede yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 savunmas\u0131nda m\u00fc\u015ftekiyi tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, mahalleden tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 F.S.nin bankaya kredi borcu oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in hesab\u0131n\u0131 kullanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyerek amcas\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6nderece\u011fi paray\u0131 \u00e7ekmek i\u00e7in banka hesab\u0131n\u0131 kullanma hususunda kendisinden yard\u0131m istedi\u011fini, kendisinin de hesab\u0131na yatan paray\u0131 bankadan \u00e7ekerek F.S.ye verdi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. Doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k eylemini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirenin kendisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, F.S. taraf\u0131ndan doland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu ki\u015finin a\u00e7\u0131k adresini bilmemekle beraber sosyal medya hesab\u0131n\u0131 ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine verdi\u011fini, m\u00fc\u015ftekiyi arayan numaran\u0131n kime ait oldu\u011funun ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bankadan para \u00e7ekerek F.S.ye verdi\u011fi ana ili\u015fkin kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n temin edilmedi\u011fini, F.S.nin 0545…1485 numaral\u0131 telefonu kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, F.S.nin mahkeme huzuruna \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131larak dinlenmedi\u011fini belirterek isnat edilen su\u00e7lamay\u0131 reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Yine ayn\u0131 celsede mahkeme g\u00f6revlisi, ba\u015fvurucunun F.S.nin kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtti\u011fi telefon numaras\u0131n\u0131 (0545…1485) arad\u0131\u011f\u0131nda GSM Operat\u00f6r\u00fcnde kay\u0131tl\u0131 b\u00f6yle bir numaran\u0131n olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunu Mahkemeye bildirmi\u015f, Mahkeme bu hususu tutana\u011fa ge\u00e7irmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. \u0130kinci celsede san\u0131k m\u00fcdafiinin celse aras\u0131nda Mahkemeye g\u00f6nderdi\u011fi yaz\u0131l\u0131 savunmada; m\u00fcvekkilinin (ba\u015fvurucu) bahse konu paran\u0131n hesab\u0131na yat\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131ndan dolay\u0131 yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, s\u00f6z konusu paran\u0131n m\u00fcvekkilinin hesab\u0131na yatmas\u0131n\u0131n nedeninin mahalleden tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 F.S.nin bankaya kredi borcu oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in hesab\u0131n\u0131 kullanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemesi ve bunun \u00fczerine arkada\u015f\u0131na hesap bilgilerini vermesi oldu\u011funu, bunu arkada\u015f\u0131na yard\u0131m etmek i\u00e7in yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, hesab\u0131na yatan paray\u0131 F.S.ye verdi\u011fini, hi\u00e7bir maddi menfaatinin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca bu hususlar\u0131n tespiti amac\u0131yla F.S.nin bulunup dinlenilmesi ve banka kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n elde edilmesini talep etmi\u015f, ancak Mahkeme “dosyadaki mevcut delil itibariyle, tevsi tahkikat taleplerinin yarg\u0131lamaya bir katk\u0131 sa\u011flayacak nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131” gerek\u00e7esiyle talepleri reddetmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucunun at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7tan hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“…[s]u\u00e7 tarihinde m\u00fc\u015ftekinin cep telefonunu arayarak Banka Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcnden arad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyen \u015fahs\u0131n, m\u00fc\u015ftekiye kredisi nedeniyle yap\u0131lan kesinti ve sigorta bedellerinin iade edilece\u011fini s\u00f6yleyerek yan\u0131[l]tt\u0131\u011f\u0131, m\u00fc\u015ftekiden kart [b]ilgilerini \u00f6\u011frenerek m\u00fc\u015ftekinin hesab\u0131ndan kendi hesab\u0131na 18.350 TL havale yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddas\u0131yla a\u00e7\u0131lan kamu davas\u0131nda; san\u0131k savunmas\u0131nda [F.S.] isimli bir arkada\u015f\u0131n\u0131n kendisine para gelece\u011finden bahisle hesab\u0131n\u0131 kullanmak i\u00e7in yard\u0131m istedi\u011fini, yard\u0131m ama\u00e7l\u0131 kendi hesap bilgilerini verdi\u011fini, gelen paray\u0131 da \u00e7ekerek arkada\u015f\u0131na verdi\u011fini, arkada\u015f\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k kimlik bilgilerini veya adresini bilmedi\u011fini beyan ederek at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7lamay\u0131 kabul etmemi\u015f ise de; iddia, san\u0131k ve m\u00fc\u015ftekinin beyanlar\u0131, banka yaz\u0131 cevab\u0131 ve t\u00fcm dosya kapsam\u0131 itibariyle san\u0131k savunmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131[n] ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7tan kurtulmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131larak savunmalar\u0131na itibar edilmemi\u015f olup, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7tan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki \u015fekilde h\u00fck\u00fcm tesis edilmi\u015ftir.”<\/p>\n
7. Ba\u015fvurucu; istinaf dilek\u00e7esinde di\u011ferlerinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra banka hesap bilgilerini F.S.ye verdi\u011fini, arkada\u015f\u0131na ait somut bilgiler vermesine ve bu hususlar\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 istemesine ra\u011fmen Mahkemece bu y\u00f6ndeki taleplerinin hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak reddedildi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. H\u00fck\u00fcm, kanun yolu denetiminden ge\u00e7erek 26\/1\/2021 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 5\/2\/2021 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 4\/3\/2021 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
9. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucu; mahalleden tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 F.S.nin bankaya kredi borcu oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in hesab\u0131n\u0131 kullanamad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6yleyerek amcas\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6nderece\u011fi paray\u0131 \u00e7ekmek i\u00e7in kendisinin banka hesab\u0131n\u0131 kullanma hususunda yard\u0131m istedi\u011fini, hesab\u0131na yatan paray\u0131 bankadan \u00e7ekerek F.S.ye verdi\u011fini, doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k eylemini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirenin kendisi olmay\u0131p F.S.nin kendisini doland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Ayr\u0131ca bu ki\u015finin a\u00e7\u0131k adresini bilmemekle beraber sosyal medya hesab\u0131n\u0131 ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine verdi\u011fini, m\u00fc\u015ftekiyi arayan numaran\u0131n sahibinin kim oldu\u011funun ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bankadan para \u00e7ekerek F.S.ye verdi\u011fi ana ili\u015fkin kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n temin edilmedi\u011fini, F.S.nin Mahkeme huzuruna \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131l\u0131p dinlenilmedi\u011fini, bu husustaki tevsi-i tahkikat taleplerinin 26\/12\/2018 tarihli ikinci celsede reddedildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrerek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 ile e\u015fitlik ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fini iddia etmi\u015ftir. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ba\u015fvurucunun duru\u015fmada lehine olan hususlar\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrebildi\u011fi, aleyhine olan delillere kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kabildi\u011fi, yarg\u0131lamaya konu olay\u0131 Mahkemede kendi a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan anlatabildi\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucunun iddialar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6z\u00fcn\u00fcn adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00fcvencelerinden biri olan silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu, bu kapsamda bir inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. 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 ba\u015fvuruda, silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
13. Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesi uyar\u0131nca herkes iddiada bulunma, savunma ve adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131na sahiptir. Anayasa’n\u0131n an\u0131lan maddesinde adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131ndan ayr\u0131 olarak iddia ve savunma hakk\u0131na birlikte yer verilmesi, taraflara iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131 mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde dile getirme f\u0131rsat\u0131 tan\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131n\u0131 da i\u00e7ermektedir (Mehmet Fidan, B. No: 2014\/14673, 20\/9\/2017, \u00a7 37).<\/p>\n
14. Di\u011fer yandan Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesine “…ile adil yarg\u0131lanma” ibaresinin eklenmesine ili\u015fkin gerek\u00e7ede, T\u00fcrkiye’nin taraf oldu\u011fu uluslararas\u0131 s\u00f6zle\u015fmelerce de g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lama hakk\u0131n\u0131n madde metnine d\u00e2hil edildi\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Nitekim Anayasa Mahkemesi de Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesi uyar\u0131nca inceleme yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda, Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesi i\u00e7tihad\u0131yla adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131na d\u00e2hil edilen silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerine Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesi kapsam\u0131nda yer vermektedir. Bu itibarla an\u0131lan ilkelerin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam ve i\u00e7eri\u011fine d\u00e2hil oldu\u011fu sonucu ortaya \u00e7\u0131kmaktad\u0131r. An\u0131lan ilkelere uygun y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmeyen bir yarg\u0131laman\u0131n hakkaniyete uygun olmas\u0131 olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir (Ruh\u015fen Mahmuto\u011flu, B. No: 2015\/22, 15\/1\/2020, \u00a7 56).<\/p>\n
15. Ceza davas\u0131nda ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 hedeflenen temel ama\u00e7, maddi ger\u00e7e\u011fin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131na uygun olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lmas\u0131d\u0131r. \u00c7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkesi, bu amac\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesinin en \u00f6nemli unsurlar\u0131ndand\u0131r. An\u0131lan ilke taraflara dava dosyas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda bilgi sahibi olma ve yorum yapma hakk\u0131n\u0131n tan\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmektedir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ceza davalar\u0131nda mahkemenin karar\u0131n\u0131 etkilemek amac\u0131yla dosyaya sunulan g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ve delillerden san\u0131\u011f\u0131n haberdar olmas\u0131na, bunlara kar\u015f\u0131 etkili bir \u015fekilde kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131na f\u0131rsat verilmesi gerekir (Tahir G\u00f6katalay, B. No: 2013\/1780, 20\/3\/2014, \u00a7 25; Cezair Akg\u00fcl, B. No: 2014\/10634, 26\/10\/2016, \u00a7\u00a7 27-31).<\/p>\n
16. \u00c7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir amac\u0131 da dosyaya bir g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\/talebin girmesini sa\u011flamakla s\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131 olmay\u0131p onun mahkemece dikkate al\u0131narak bir sonuca ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamakt\u0131r. \u00c7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkesi, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhindeki delillerin \u00e7eli\u015fmeli bir usul ile mahkemeye sunulmas\u0131n\u0131 ve sadece tan\u0131k beyanlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011fil di\u011fer delillerin de tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirir. B\u00f6ylelikle san\u0131klar delilin davayla ilgisini ve a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirerek g\u00fcvenirli\u011fi hususundaki iddialar\u0131n\u0131 ve itirazlar\u0131n\u0131 dile getirebilecektir (Cezair Akg\u00fcl, \u00a7 28).<\/p>\n
17. Taraflar aras\u0131nda hakkaniyete uygun bir dengenin sa\u011flanmas\u0131n\u0131 ama\u00e7layan silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ilkesi ise davan\u0131n taraflar\u0131n\u0131n usule ili\u015fkin haklar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan ayn\u0131 ko\u015fullara tabi tutulmas\u0131, taraflardan birinin di\u011ferine g\u00f6re daha zay\u0131f bir duruma d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclmeksizin iddia ve savunmalar\u0131n\u0131 makul bir \u015fekilde mahkeme \u00f6n\u00fcnde dile getirme f\u0131rsat\u0131na sahip olmas\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelir (Ya\u015fas\u0131n Aslan, B. No: 2013\/1134, 16\/5\/2013, \u00a7 32).<\/p>\n
18. Belirli bir davaya ili\u015fkin olarak delilleri de\u011ferlendirme ve g\u00f6sterilen delilin davayla ilgili olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verme yetkisi kural olarak yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten mahkemeye aittir. Bu konuda de\u011ferlendirme yapmak Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi de\u011fildir. Bununla birlikte yarg\u0131lamada adil yarg\u0131lama hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerine gerekti\u011fi \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde riayet edilip edilmedi\u011fi Anayasa Mahkemesinin denetim yetkisi kapsam\u0131ndad\u0131r. An\u0131lan ilkeler kapsam\u0131nda yap\u0131lacak incelemede, delillere ili\u015fkin olarak iddia ve savunma makam\u0131 aras\u0131nda olu\u015fturulan dengesizlik iddialar\u0131n\u0131n da yarg\u0131laman\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekir. \u00d6zellikle savunma makamlar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n elde etme olana\u011f\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 deliller y\u00f6n\u00fcnden bunlar\u0131n aksini ortaya koyma hususunda savunma makam\u0131na makul imk\u00e2nlar\u0131 sunmal\u0131d\u0131r (Ruh\u015fen Mahmuto\u011flu, \u00a7 60).<\/p>\n
19. Somut olayda Mahkeme, m\u00fc\u015ftekinin para yat\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hesap bilgilerini ba\u015fvurucunun F.S. isimli arkada\u015f\u0131na verdi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik savunmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k “san\u0131k savunmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7tan kurtulmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu” \u015feklindeki gerek\u00e7e ile ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
20. Ba\u015fvurucu, soru\u015fturma ve kovu\u015fturma evrelerinde \u0131srarla para \u00e7ekme eylemini mahalleden tan\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 F.S.ye yard\u0131m etmek amac\u0131yla ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fini ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, kolluk ifadesinde bu ki\u015finin e\u015fk\u00e2lini vermi\u015f; amcas\u0131yla ara\u00e7 kiralama i\u015fi yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f; F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc foto\u011fraflar\u0131 kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine teslim etmi\u015ftir. Soru\u015fturma evrak\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun bildirdi\u011fi sosyal medya hesab\u0131 ve foto\u011fraflar \u00fczerinden F.S.nin kimlik ve adres bilgilerinin belirlenmesine ili\u015fkin \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair herhangi bir kay\u0131t bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucu, kovu\u015fturma evresinde F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bir cep telefonu numaras\u0131n\u0131 Mahkemeye bildirmi\u015ftir. Duru\u015fma s\u0131ras\u0131nda bir mahkeme g\u00f6revlisi bu numaray\u0131 aram\u0131\u015f ve aramaya cevap olarak operat\u00f6r, GSM Operat\u00f6r\u00fcnde kay\u0131tl\u0131 b\u00f6yle bir numara bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Mahkeme, bildirilen telefon numaras\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6revli taraf\u0131ndan aratt\u0131rmak haricinde ba\u015fvurucunun verdi\u011fi bilgiler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde F.S.nin a\u00e7\u0131k kimli\u011finin ve adres bilgilerinin tespitine ili\u015fkin herhangi bir ara\u015ft\u0131rma yapmam\u0131\u015f; ba\u015fvurucunun bu y\u00f6ndeki talebini “dosyadaki mevcut delil itibariyle, tevsi tahkikat taleplerinin yarg\u0131lamaya bir katk\u0131 sa\u011flayacak nitelik ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131” gerek\u00e7esiyle reddetmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
21. Ba\u015fvurucunun a\u015famalardaki beyanlar\u0131nda eylemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren ki\u015finin F.S. oldu\u011funu, F.S.nin kendisini de doland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrmesi, F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu iddia etti\u011fi sosyal medya hesab\u0131n\u0131 ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine bildirmesi, kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n getirtilmesini istemesi kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda 4\/12\/2004 tarihli ve 5271 say\u0131l\u0131 Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc t\u00fcm ceza davalar\u0131n\u0131n tek celsede bitirilmesini ama\u00e7layan kesiksizlik ilkesinin uygulamaya ge\u00e7irilebilmesi ad\u0131na ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin kimlik ve adres bilgilerinin tespiti hususunda soru\u015fturma evresinde delillerin toplanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi h\u00e2lde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k taraf\u0131ndan yeterli ara\u015ft\u0131rma yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bunun yan\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun an\u0131lan hususlarda ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc taleplerin Mahkeme taraf\u0131ndan soyut gerek\u00e7elerle reddine karar verilmesiyle ba\u015fvurucu iddia makam\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda dezavantajl\u0131 duruma d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Bu ko\u015fullarda Mahkemenin izledi\u011fi y\u00f6ntemin silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin gereklerine uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun menfaatlerini koruyan g\u00fcvenceler i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Bu durum, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n bir b\u00fct\u00fcn h\u00e2linde adil olmaktan \u00e7\u0131kmas\u0131na neden olmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
22. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
23. Ba\u015fvurucu, e\u015fitlik ilkesinin ve gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n da ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkeleri \u015fik\u00e2yeti y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun bu iddialar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesine gerek bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
24. Belirli bir davaya ili\u015fkin olarak delilleri de\u011ferlendirme ve g\u00f6sterilen delilin davayla ilgili olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verme yetkisi kural olarak yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten mahkemelere aittir (Orhan K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2014\/4704, 1\/2\/2018, \u00a7 44). Bu ba\u011flamda somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu i\u015fleyip i\u015flemedi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde karar vermek Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00f6revi de\u011fildir. Anayasa Mahkemesince verilen ihlal karar\u0131, san\u0131\u011f\u0131n beraat etti\u011fi anlam\u0131na gelmedi\u011fi gibi ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n gereklerinin yerine getirilmesi amac\u0131yla yap\u0131lacak yeniden yarg\u0131lama neticesinde san\u0131k hakk\u0131nda mutlaka beraat karar\u0131 verilmesi gerekti\u011fi anlam\u0131na da gelmemektedir. \u0130hlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 gidermek \u00fczere gereken i\u015flemler yerine getirildikten sonra yap\u0131lacak de\u011ferlendirmede mahkemenin delillerin takdir bi\u00e7imine g\u00f6re benzer veya farkl\u0131 bir sonuca varmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
25. Ba\u015fvurucu, ihlalin tespiti ve yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
26. Ba\u015fvuruda tespit edilen 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
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. 1. Silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesine GEREK BULUNMADI\u011eINA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere \u0130stanbul Anadolu 9. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2018\/276, K.2018\/490) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. 487,60 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.287,60 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. \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
F. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 18\/7\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi \u0130kinci B\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fc 18\/7\/2024 tarihinde, E\u015fref Bing\u00f6l (B. No: 2021\/10332) ba\u015fvurusunda Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar vermi\u015ftir.\u00a0Hukuki Haber<\/p>\n
Haberin Al\u0131nt\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 Kaynak: www.hukukihaber.net<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Olaylar Bankadan arad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtip kredi nedeniyle yap\u0131lan kesinti ve sigorta bedellerinin iade edilece\u011fini s\u00f6yleyerek hileli hareketlerle m\u00fc\u015ftekiden menfaat sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle hakk\u0131nda soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lan ba\u015fvurucunun nitelikli doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011finden bahisle cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle iddianame d\u00fczenlenmi\u015ftir. Gerek soru\u015fturma evresinde gerekse duru\u015fma devresinde ba\u015fvurucu; doland\u0131r\u0131c\u0131l\u0131k eylemini ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirenin kendisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bilakis F.S. taraf\u0131ndan doland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia ederek birtak\u0131m deliller toplanmas\u0131n\u0131 talep etmi\u015ftir. Dava sonucunda mahkeme, ba\u015fvurucunun at\u0131l\u0131 su\u00e7tan hapis cezas\u0131yla cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun istinaf talebi reddedilerek h\u00fck\u00fcm kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. \u0130ddialar Ba\u015fvurucu, ceza davas\u0131nda cezay\u0131 azaltabilecek ya da ortadan kald\u0131rabilecek olgular\u0131n ara\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebinin reddedilmesi nedeniyle silahlar\u0131n e\u015fitli\u011fi ve \u00e7eli\u015fmeli yarg\u0131lama ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Mahkemenin De\u011ferlendirmesi Somut olayda mahkeme, m\u00fc\u015ftekinin para yat\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 hesap bilgilerini ba\u015fvurucunun F.S. isimli arkada\u015f\u0131na verdi\u011fine y\u00f6nelik savunmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k \u201csan\u0131k savunmas\u0131n\u0131n hayat\u0131n ola\u011fan ak\u0131\u015f\u0131na uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, savunmalar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7tan kurtulmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu\u201d \u015feklindeki gerek\u00e7e ile ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, a\u015famalardaki beyanlar\u0131nda eylemi ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftiren ki\u015finin F.S. oldu\u011funu, F.S.nin kendisini de doland\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f; F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu iddia etti\u011fi sosyal medya hesab\u0131n\u0131 ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 kolluk g\u00f6revlilerine bildirmi\u015f, ayr\u0131ca kamera kay\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n getirtilmesi gibi taleplerde bulunmu\u015ftur. Dahas\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu, duru\u015fmada s\u0131ras\u0131nda F.S.ye ait oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bir cep telefonu numaras\u0131n\u0131 da mahkemeye bildirmi\u015ftir. Bu delil ve talepler kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, ad\u0131 ge\u00e7en ki\u015finin kimlik ve adres bilgilerinin tespiti hususunda …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":0,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27,535],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-18879","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n