T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
R\u00dcSTEM BOZKURT BATUM BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/12145)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 11\/6\/2024<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\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
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Muhterem \u0130NCE<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Ekin \u00c7ANKAL<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
R\u00fcstem Bozkurt BATUM<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Sevgi KALAN G\u00dcVERC\u0130N<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, Twitter hesab\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan payla\u015f\u0131m sebebiyle aleyhe manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ihlal etti\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucu; \u00fclke genelinde tan\u0131nan gazeteci, yazar ve televizyoncudur. Y\u00fcz bini a\u015fk\u0131n takip\u00e7isi bulunan ba\u015fvurucu, ki\u015fisel Twitter hesab\u0131ndan hukuki ve siyasi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerinipayla\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Estetik Yay\u0131n A.\u015e.ye (davac\u0131) ait S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi ise 27\/7\/2007 tarihinde kurulmu\u015f olup kendisini Atat\u00fcrk\u00e7\u00fc, ulusal ve sek\u00fcler \u00e7izgide tan\u0131mlamaktad\u0131r. Mezk\u00fbr gazete, olaylar\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi tarihte \u00fclke genelinde en \u00e7ok tiraj\u0131 olan gazetelerden biridir.<\/p>\n
3. S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi 25\/6\/2015 tarihinde “Her partiden, her g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ften milletvekillerine \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131: Atat\u00fcrk’\u00fcn Kurdu\u011fu Bu Cumhuriyet’in De\u011ferini Bilin” \u015feklinde bir man\u015fet atm\u0131\u015f, haberin i\u00e7eri\u011finde ise K\u00fcrt vekil, \u0130slamc\u0131 vekil, Ermeni vekil, Roman vekil, Ezidi vekil ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 alt\u0131nda be\u015f ayr\u0131 milletvekilinin ismi, soy ismi ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 yay\u0131mlayarak, “Cumhuriyet sayesinde dil, din, \u0131rk, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ayr\u0131m\u0131 olmadan herkes her mevkiye gelebiliyor, \u00fclke y\u00f6netiminde yer alabiliyor. Ter\u00f6ristba\u015f\u0131 Apo’nun akrabas\u0131 da olsan, dincilerin bayraktarl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 da yapsan, az\u0131nl\u0131k da olsan bu Cumhuriyet hi\u00e7bir ayr\u0131m yapmadan seni kucakl\u0131yor. Meclis’e girip sesini duyurman\u0131, hatta T\u00fcrkiye’yi y\u00f6netmeni de sa\u011fl\u0131yor.” \u015feklinde ifadelere yer vermi\u015ftir. Buna ilaveten, her bir milletvekilinin foto\u011fraf\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131nda kullan\u0131lan ifadeler \u015fu \u015fekildedir:<\/p>\n
“[D.\u00d6.] (K\u00fcrt vekil), 30 bin ki\u015finin katili Apo’nun ye\u011feni ve K\u00fcrt. Ayr\u0131ma u\u011framad\u0131, vekil oldu.”<\/p>\n
“[R.K.] (\u0130slamc\u0131 vekil), 1999’da Meclis’e t\u00fcrbanla girdi\u011fi i\u00e7in tepki \u00e7eken [M.K.’n\u0131n] karde\u015fi.”<\/p>\n
“[M.E.] (Ermeni vekil), Ermeni as\u0131ll\u0131 bir ailenin \u00e7ocu\u011fu. Cumhuriyet sayesinde Meclis’e girip yemin etti.” <\/p>\n
“[\u00d6.P.] (Roman vekil), Roman vatanda\u015flar\u0131m\u0131zdan. Hi\u00e7bir ayr\u0131ma u\u011framadan se\u00e7ildi. Meslis’e girdi.” <\/p>\n
“[F.U.] (Ezidi vekil), Ezidi as\u0131ll\u0131 T\u00fcrk vatanda\u015f\u0131. T\u00fcrk\u00e7e konu\u015fmakta zorlansa da yemin etti.”<\/p>\n
4. Gazetenin on birinci sayfas\u0131nda yer alan haberin devam\u0131nda ise \u015fu ifadeler kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r:<\/p>\n
“Rejimin ho\u015fg\u00f6r\u00fcs\u00fc ve b\u00fcy\u00fckl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc K\u00fcrt, Ermeni, Ezidi, S\u00fcryani, Roman ya da siyasal islamc\u0131 gibi isimlerin TBMM gibi y\u00fcce bir \u00e7at\u0131 alt\u0131nda toplan\u0131p politika yapabilmesine de olanak tan\u0131d\u0131… TBMM’ye giren kad\u0131n vekillerden biri de ba\u015f\u00f6rt\u00fcl\u00fc [M.K.’n\u0131n] karde\u015fi \u0130stanbul AKP milletvekili [R.K.] ablas\u0131n\u0131n 16 y\u0131l \u00f6nce takt\u0131\u011f\u0131 t\u00fcrbanla Genel Kurul’da yemin etti. AKP, CHP ve HDP’den se\u00e7ilen Ermeni ve S\u00fcryani milletvekilleri de yemin ederek Meclis’e girdi.”<\/p>\n
5. Bunun \u00fczerine ulusal d\u00fczeyde baz\u0131 yay\u0131n kurulu\u015flar\u0131 habere tepki g\u00f6stermi\u015f; “S\u00f6zc\u00fc yine nefret kustu”, “S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi nefret su\u00e7u i\u015fledi”, “S\u00f6zc\u00fc vekilleri hedef ald\u0131”, “S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi kin kustu” ifadeleriyle haberi ele\u015ftirmi\u015ftir. Yine \u0131rk\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u011fa kar\u015f\u0131 \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131yla bilinen H.D. Vakf\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan Medyada Nefret S\u00f6ylemi \u0130zleme Raporu’nda s\u00f6z konusu haberin Ermenileri, Ezidileri, K\u00fcrtleri, M\u00fcsl\u00fcmanlar\u0131, Romanlar\u0131 hedef g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucu ise haberin yay\u0131mland\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihte Twitter hesab\u0131ndan “Irk\u00e7\u0131 fa\u015fist ka\u011f\u0131t par\u00e7as\u0131! G.t\u00fcn\u00fcz\u00fc silmek i\u00e7in bile kullanmay\u0131n leke yapar!” \u015feklinde payla\u015f\u0131mda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
7. S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesinin sahibi olan \u015firket (davac\u0131), ba\u015fvurucunun bu yorumuylaki\u015filik haklar\u0131na zarar verdi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla 4\/2\/2017 tarihinde 15.000 TL mebla\u011f\u0131nda manevi tazminat istemiyle dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dava dilek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle, gazetenin yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu haberin ger\u00e7e\u011fe ayk\u0131r\u0131 beyan i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi, milletvekilli\u011fi en \u00e7ok tart\u0131\u015f\u0131lan ki\u015filer \u00f6rnek verilmek suretiyle kamuoyunun dikkatini \u00e7ekme amac\u0131yla haberin kaleme al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucunun payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ise ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hakaret i\u00e7erikli oldu\u011fu ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
8. Yarg\u0131lamay\u0131 yapan \u0130stanbul 15. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi 20\/3\/2018 tarihinde manevi tazminat istemini i\u00e7eren davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. Mahkeme; gazetede yay\u0131mlanan 25\/6\/2015 tarihli haberin \u00e7e\u015fitli bas\u0131n ve yay\u0131n organlar\u0131nca a\u011f\u0131r \u015fekilde ele\u015ftirildi\u011fini dikkate alm\u0131\u015f, ba\u015fvurucunun da tan\u0131nan bir gazeteci olarak haberi ele\u015ftiren bir payla\u015f\u0131m yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve gazetenin ger\u00e7ek ki\u015filerin aksine ele\u015ftirilerden daha az etkilenebilecek konumda oldu\u011fu, ele\u015ftirilere kar\u015f\u0131 toleransl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi kanaatine varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
9. \u0130lk derece mahkemesinin 20\/3\/2018 tarihinde verdi\u011fi karar davac\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan istinaf edilmi\u015ftir. \u0130stinaf talebini de\u011ferlendiren \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 4. Hukuk Dairesi (B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi) karar\u0131 kald\u0131rarak davac\u0131n\u0131n manevi tazminat isteminin k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne, 5.000 TL manevi tazminat\u0131n payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten itibaren i\u015fleyecek yasal faiziyle birlikte ba\u015fvurucudan tahsiline kesin olarak karar vermi\u015ftir. B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi gerek\u00e7esinde \u00f6zetle ba\u015fvurucunun Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifadelerin tahkir ve tezyif edici nitelikte a\u011f\u0131r ele\u015ftirinin \u00f6tesinde oldu\u011funu, bu payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ve ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 boyutuna ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Nihai karar 11\/3\/2020 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu 3\/4\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. 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
11. Ba\u015fvurucu; S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesinde yer alan ba\u015fvuruya konu haberin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a nefret s\u00f6ylemi i\u00e7erdi\u011fini, Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda ge\u00e7en ifadelerin ise habere cevaben ele\u015ftiri mahiyetinde oldu\u011funu, payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n i\u00e7eri\u011finin ba\u011flam\u0131ndan kopar\u0131larak aleyhine manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ayr\u0131ca ba\u015fvurucu, s\u00f6z konusu haberde milletvekillerinin farkl\u0131 etnik k\u00f6kenleri oldu\u011fu \u00f6n plana \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131larak toplum nezdinde hedef g\u00f6sterildiklerini, \u00f6tekile\u015ftirildiklerini, \u00fcstelik Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tarihten yakla\u015f\u0131k bir bu\u00e7uk y\u0131l sonra aleyhine manevi tazminat davas\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 vurgulam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda adil bir denge kurulup kurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyan\u0131nda bireysel ba\u015fvuru formunda ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc iddialar\u0131 yinelemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvuru, ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi; Anayasa’n\u0131n 26. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile onun \u00f6zel g\u00fcvencelere ba\u011flanm\u0131\u015f \u015fekli olan ve Anayasa’n\u0131n 28. maddesinde d\u00fczenlenen bas\u0131n \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn demokratik bir toplumun zorunlu temellerinden oldu\u011funu, toplumun ilerlemesi ve her bireyin geli\u015fmesi i\u00e7in gerekli temel \u015fartlardan birini olu\u015fturdu\u011funu daha \u00f6nce pek \u00e7ok kez ifade etmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda inceleme yaparken ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile bas\u0131n \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn herkes i\u00e7in ge\u00e7erli ve demokrasinin i\u015fleyi\u015fi i\u00e7in ya\u015famsal \u00f6nemde oldu\u011fu dikkate al\u0131nacakt\u0131r (Mehmet Ali Ayd\u0131n, B. No: 2013\/9343, 4\/6\/2015, \u00a7 69; Bekir Co\u015fkun [GK], B. No:2014\/12151, 4\/6\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 34-36). Zira bas\u0131n \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn kamuoyuna \u00e7e\u015fitli fikir ve tutumlar\u0131n iletilmesi ile bunlara ili\u015fkin bir kanaat olu\u015fturmas\u0131 i\u00e7in en iyi ara\u00e7lardan birini sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r (\u0130lhan Cihaner (2), B. No: 2013\/5574, 30\/6\/2014, \u00a7 63).<\/p>\n
13. A\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilmesini gerektirecek ba\u015fka bir nedeni de bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. \u0130fade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen m\u00fcdahalenin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan 11\/1\/2011 tarihli ve 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu’nun 58. maddesinin kanunilik \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fc kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir. M\u00fcdahalenin ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n \u015f\u00f6hret veya haklar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik \u00f6nlemlerin bir par\u00e7as\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve me\u015fru bir ama\u00e7 ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu noktada m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin gereklerine uygunluk \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmesi gereklidir.<\/p>\n
15. Anayasa’n\u0131n 26. maddesinde korunan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne yap\u0131lan bir m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik toplum d\u00fczeninin gereklerine uygun kabul edilebilmesi i\u00e7in kamu makamlar\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan ortaya konulan gerek\u00e7elerin ilgili ve yeterli olmas\u0131 gerekir (di\u011ferleri aras\u0131ndan bkz. Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, B. No: 2014\/1577, 25\/10\/2017, \u00a7 58; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 56; Tansel \u00c7\u00f6la\u015fan, B. No: 2014\/6128, 7\/7\/2015, \u00a7 56; Z\u00fcbeyde F\u00fcsun \u00dcstel ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2018\/17635, 26\/7\/2019, \u00a7 120; S\u0131rr\u0131 S\u00fcreyya \u00d6nder [GK], B. No: 2018\/38143, 3\/10\/2019, \u00a7 60. Bunun i\u00e7in ba\u015fvuruya benzer davalarda mahkemelerin taraflardan birinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile di\u011ferinin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda adil bir denge sa\u011flamas\u0131 hayati \u00f6nem ta\u015f\u0131maktad\u0131r. Dengeleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 gereken \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctler genel olarak \u015funlard\u0131r:<\/p>\n
i. \u0130fadelerin kim taraf\u0131ndan dile getirildi\u011fi (Nihat Zeybekci, B. No: 2015\/5633, 8\/5\/2019, \u00a7 29; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu,\u00a7 59),<\/p>\n
ii. Hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin kim oldu\u011fu, \u00fcnl\u00fcl\u00fck d\u00fczeyi ve \u00f6nceki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131 yan\u0131nda katlanmas\u0131 gereken ele\u015ftirinin s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n sade bir vatanda\u015fa g\u00f6re daha geni\u015f olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin kamusal yetki kullanan bir g\u00f6revli olmas\u0131 nedeniyle yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmelerin bulundu\u011fu kararlar i\u00e7in bkz. Ali Suat Ertosun (7), B. No: 2014\/1416, 15\/10\/2015, \u00a7 36; Z\u00fcbeyde F\u00fcsun \u00dcstel ve di\u011ferleri [GK], \u00a7\u00a7 128, 129; Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, B. No: 2012\/1184, 16\/7\/2014, \u00a7 45; \u0130lhan Cihaner (2), \u00a7 82; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7 [GK], B. No: 2013\/6617, 8\/4\/2015, \u00a7\u00a7 60-66; hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin siyaset\u00e7i olmas\u0131 nedeniyle yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmelerin bulundu\u011fu kararlar i\u00e7in bkz. Bekir Co\u015fkun [GK], \u00a7\u00a7 66, 67;Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2) [GK], B. No: 2013\/8503, 27\/10\/2015, \u00a7 56; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, \u00a7\u00a7 59- 61 ),<\/p>\n
iii. \u0130fadelerin genel yarara ili\u015fkin bir tart\u0131\u015fmaya katk\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131p sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, kamuoyu ile di\u011fer ki\u015filerin d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda sahip olduklar\u0131 haklar\u0131n a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 69; \u00c7etin Do\u011fan (2) [GK], B. No: 2014\/3494, 27\/2\/2019, \u00a7 62; Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2), \u00a7 56; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7, \u00a7\u00a7 60-66; \u0130lhan Cihaner (2), \u00a7\u00a7 66-73; Nihat Zeybekci,\u00a7 32),<\/p>\n
iv. Kamuyu bilgilendirme de\u011feri, toplumsal ilginin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve konunun g\u00fcncel olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Seray \u015eahiner \u00d6zkan, B. No: 2016\/6439, 9\/6\/2021, \u00a7 44; \u0130brahim Okur (2), B. No: 2018\/12363, 26\/5\/2021, \u00a7 28),<\/p>\n
v. M\u00fc\u015ftekinin kendisine y\u00f6neltilen ifadelere cevap verme olana\u011f\u0131n\u0131n bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Temel Co\u015fkun, B. No: 2017\/1632, 29\/1\/2020, \u00a7 33; \u015eaban Sevin\u00e7 (2), B. No: 2016\/36777, 26\/5\/2021, \u00a7 42; Nihat Zeybekci, \u00a7 39),<\/p>\n
vi. \u0130fadelerin hedef al\u0131nan ki\u015finin hayat\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etkisi (Ali Suat Ertosun (2), B. No: 2013\/1592, 20\/5\/2015, \u00a7 33; H\u00fcseyin Kocab\u0131y\u0131k, B. No: 2020\/15593, 22\/11\/2022, \u00a7 24),<\/p>\n
vii. Cezaland\u0131rmaya konu edilen ifadelerin kullan\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131ndan kopart\u0131l\u0131p kopart\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Nilg\u00fcn Halloran, \u00a7 52; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7\u00a7 62, 63; \u00d6nder Bal\u0131k\u00e7\u0131, B. No: 2014\/6009, 15\/2\/2017, \u00a7 45, Nihat Zeybekci, \u00a7 36),<\/p>\n
viii. Ba\u015fvurucunun yapt\u0131r\u0131ma maruz kalma endi\u015fesinin ba\u015fvurucu \u00fczerinde cayd\u0131r\u0131c\u0131 etki yarat\u0131p yaratmayaca\u011f\u0131 (benzer y\u00f6ndeki de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Erg\u00fcn Poyraz (2), \u00a7 79; Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu ve Cumhuriyet Halk Partisi, B. No: 2014\/12482, 8\/5\/2019, \u00a7 46),<\/p>\n
ix. Dava konusu s\u00f6ylemlerin maddi vak\u0131alar\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 veya de\u011fer yarg\u0131s\u0131 olarak nitelendirilip nitelendirilemeyece\u011fi (Durmu\u015f Fikri Sa\u011flar (2) [GK], B. No: 2017\/29735, 17\/3\/2021, \u00a7 50; Deniz Karadeniz ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2014\/18001, 6\/2\/2020, \u00a7\u00a7 48-49).<\/p>\n
16. Anayasa Mahkemesi; somut olay\u0131n ko\u015fullar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 sebebiyle aleyhine manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesinin zorunlu bir ihtiyaca kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k gelip gelmedi\u011fini, ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmesi istenen me\u015fru ama\u00e7la orant\u0131l\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bunu hakl\u0131 g\u00f6stermek i\u00e7in ortaya konan gerek\u00e7enin Anayasa Mahkemesince ortaya konulan ve yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan kriterleri kar\u015f\u0131layan ilgili ve yeterli bir gerek\u00e7e olarak g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcp g\u00f6r\u00fcnmedi\u011fini davan\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcne bakarak de\u011ferlendirecektir (benzer y\u00f6nde de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Kemal K\u0131l\u0131\u00e7daro\u011flu, \u00a7 58; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 56; Tansel \u00c7\u00f6la\u015fan, \u00a7 56; Z\u00fcbeyde F\u00fcsun \u00dcstel ve di\u011ferleri [GK], \u00a7 120).<\/p>\n
17. Somut olayda S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesinin mezk\u00fbr haberinde milletvekillerinin isim, soy ismi ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131yla birlikte etnik k\u00f6kenlerinin, din\u00ee tercihlerinin \u00f6n plana \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131; milletvekillerinden baz\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n toplumca tan\u0131nan aile fertlerine de haberde yer verildi\u011fi ve bu ki\u015filerin Mecliste yemin etmelerinin devlet\u00e7e verilmi\u015f bir l\u00fctuf olarak okuyucuya sunuldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bahsi ge\u00e7en haber \u00e7e\u015fitli yay\u0131n organlar\u0131nca a\u011f\u0131r \u015fekilde ele\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. Bir gazeteci olan ba\u015fvurucu da haberle ilgili bir Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda bulunarak tart\u0131\u015fmaya kat\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu ba\u011flamda, somut olaydaki ifadelerin alayc\u0131, sert, abart\u0131l\u0131 hatta muhatab\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan rahats\u0131z edici oldu\u011fu kabul edilse bile kamu menfaatine ili\u015fkin olup politik bir tart\u0131\u015fma s\u0131ras\u0131nda kullan\u0131ld\u0131klar\u0131 nazara al\u0131narak bu s\u00f6zlere m\u00fcdahale i\u00e7in toplum menfaatine bask\u0131n gelen bir gerek\u00e7e sunulmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi unutulmamal\u0131d\u0131r.<\/p>\n
19. Bu kapsamda ba\u015fvuruya konu payla\u015f\u0131m incelendi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifadelerin maddi olgular\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin olmayan tamamen de\u011fer yarg\u0131s\u0131 niteli\u011finde a\u00e7\u0131klamalardan olu\u015ftu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, davac\u0131 gazete i\u00e7in “\u0131rk\u00e7\u0131 fa\u015fist ka\u011f\u0131t par\u00e7as\u0131!” ifadesini kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu \u015fekilde gazetenin ayr\u0131mc\u0131l\u0131k yaparak milletvekillerini etnik k\u00f6ken, din\u00ee tercih vb. zeminler \u00fczerinden \u00f6tekile\u015ftirmek suretiyle asl\u0131nda bu ki\u015filerin T\u00fcrk olmad\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 vurgulad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u0131rk\u00e7\u0131 ve fa\u015fizan bir yakla\u015f\u0131m sergiledi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f, ka\u011f\u0131t par\u00e7as\u0131 ifadesiyle onu de\u011fersizle\u015ftirmi\u015ftir. Yine de\u011fersizle\u015ftirme gayesiyle gazetenin tuvalet ka\u011f\u0131d\u0131n\u0131 dahi ikame edecek nitelikte ve kalitede olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ima etmek amac\u0131yla “G.t\u00fcn\u00fcz\u00fc silmek i\u00e7in bile kullanmay\u0131n leke yapar!” ifadesini kullanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu noktada, toplumun bir k\u0131sm\u0131 taraf\u0131ndan kaba bulunacak bu ifadenin, S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesinin savundu\u011fu fikrin de\u011fersizli\u011fini ortaya koymak amac\u0131yla tercih edildi\u011fi s\u00f6ylenebilir.<\/p>\n
20. Bununla birlikte olaya \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar ve savunmas\u0131 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde ba\u015fvurucunun ihtilafl\u0131 s\u00f6zleri tahkir kast\u0131ndan ziyade davac\u0131 gazetenin yay\u0131n politikas\u0131n\u0131n kendisi i\u00e7in kabul edilemez bulundu\u011funu ifade etmek amac\u0131yla s\u00f6yledi\u011fini, ba\u015fvurucunun fikirlerini toplumda son derece yayg\u0131n bir kullan\u0131m alan\u0131na sahip argo ifadelerle ortaya koydu\u011funu de\u011ferlendirmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcnd\u00fcr. Anayasa Mahkemesinin yak\u0131n tarihli bir karar\u0131nda alt\u0131 \u00e7izildi\u011fi \u00fczere insanlar aras\u0131 ili\u015fkilerin tabii bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olan argo ifadeler -sebepsiz ve keyf\u00ee bir sald\u0131r\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece- otomatik olarak m\u00fcdahale konusu yap\u0131lmamal\u0131d\u0131r (bkz. Tunca \u0130lker \u00d6\u011freten (2), B. No: 2018\/3843, 13\/4\/2023, \u00a7 27). Bu ba\u011flamda d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnce a\u00e7\u0131klamas\u0131nda bulunan ki\u015filerin kullanaca\u011f\u0131 dili belirlemenin yarg\u0131 mercilerinin g\u00f6revi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 hat\u0131rlatmakta fayda vard\u0131r (bilhassa bas\u0131n \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ba\u011flam\u0131nda bkz. Nihat \u00d6zdemir [GK], B. No: 2013\/1997, 8\/4\/2015, \u00a7 48; Kadir Sa\u011fd\u0131\u00e7 [GK], \u00a7 52).<\/p>\n
21. \u00dcstelik kullan\u0131lan dil ve \u00fcslup davac\u0131 veya mahkemeler a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan rahats\u0131z edici bulunsa bile Anayasa Mahkemesinin pek \u00e7ok karar\u0131nda benimsedi\u011fi gibi demokratik bir toplumun zorunlu temellerinden olan ve toplumun ilerlemesi ve bireyin \u00f6zg\u00fcveni i\u00e7in gerekli temel \u015fartlardan birini te\u015fkil eden ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn sadece kabul g\u00f6ren veya zarars\u0131z yahut kay\u0131ts\u0131zl\u0131k i\u00e7eren bilgiler ya da fikirler i\u00e7in de\u011fil ayn\u0131 zamanda k\u0131r\u0131c\u0131, \u015fok edici veya rahats\u0131z edici olanlar i\u00e7in de ge\u00e7erli oldu\u011fu unutulmamal\u0131d\u0131r (Emin Ayd\u0131n (2), B. No: 2013\/3178, 25\/6\/2015, \u00a7 35; Bekir Co\u015fkun, \u00a7 52).<\/p>\n
22. Ba\u015fvuruya konu tart\u0131\u015fman\u0131n bizzat davac\u0131n\u0131n sahibi oldu\u011fu S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu da \u00fczerinde durulmas\u0131 gereken \u00f6nemli bir noktad\u0131r. Ba\u015fvuruya konu a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucu, S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesinin farkl\u0131 toplum kesimlerinden ciddi tepkiler alan son derece tart\u0131\u015fmal\u0131 bir haberine kar\u015f\u0131 sert bir ele\u015ftiri olarak yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. \u015eu h\u00e2lde, ba\u015fvurucunun a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n\u0131n sebepsiz ve t\u00fcm\u00fcyle keyf\u00ee ki\u015fisel bir sald\u0131r\u0131 olu\u015fturdu\u011funu kabul etmek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6r\u00fclmemektedir. T\u00fcm bunlara ilaveten ba\u015fvurucunun Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131na cevap verme imk\u00e2n\u0131 da bulunan davac\u0131n\u0131n isterse cevap niteli\u011finde yapaca\u011f\u0131 haberle ba\u015fvurucunun ula\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan \u00e7ok daha geni\u015f bir kitleye seslenme olana\u011f\u0131na sahip oldu\u011fu da g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde kendi ba\u015flatt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir tart\u0131\u015fmada kendi haber ve yorumlar\u0131na y\u00f6neltilen ele\u015ftirilere kar\u015f\u0131 tahamm\u00fcl d\u00fczeyinin daha y\u00fcksek olmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi \u015f\u00fcphesizdir.<\/p>\n
23. Yukar\u0131da yap\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131klamalara kar\u015f\u0131n B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi, Anayasa Mahkemesince ortaya konulan \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctleri g\u00f6zetmemi\u015f (bkz. \u00a7 15); somut olayda kullan\u0131lan ifadelerin ba\u011flam\u0131n\u0131, ifadelerin dile getirilme \u015fekli ve nedenini, s\u00f6ylenen s\u00f6zlerin arka plan\u0131 olup olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, davac\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nceki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131n\u0131, a\u00e7\u0131klamalar\u0131n kamusal bir tart\u0131\u015fma ekseninde ger\u00e7ekle\u015fip ger\u00e7ekle\u015fmedi\u011fini g\u00f6zetmeksizin soyut bir de\u011ferlendirmede bulunmu\u015f, c\u0131mb\u0131zlayarak ba\u011flam\u0131ndan kopartt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u015fvuru konusu ifadeyi tekil olarak ele alm\u0131\u015f ve Twitter payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015filik haklar\u0131na sald\u0131r\u0131 niteli\u011fi ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatine ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
24. Yap\u0131lan de\u011ferlendirmeler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ile \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131 aras\u0131nda adil bir denge kurulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u015fiddetli tepkilere neden olan politik bir tart\u0131\u015fma ba\u015flatan davac\u0131 gazetenin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n onu hedef alan ba\u015fvurucunun ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne bask\u0131n geldi\u011finin, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla m\u00fcdahalenin zorunlu bir toplumsal ihtiyac\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131lad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ikna edici bir bi\u00e7imde ortaya konulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. O h\u00e2lde, B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesinin ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesine ili\u015fkin ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc gerek\u00e7eler, ba\u015fvurucunun ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahale i\u00e7in ilgili ve yeterli olarak kabul edilemez.<\/p>\n
25. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
26. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti, yeniden yarg\u0131lama ile 5.000 TL maddi tazminat ve 50.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
27. 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 mahkemece 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 (bkz. 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. Eski h\u00e2le getirme kural\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcyle ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucuya manevi zararlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda net 30.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00f6denmesine karar verilmesi gerekir. Yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011finden ba\u015fvurucunun maddi tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u0130fade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 26. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere \u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 4. Hukuk Dairesine (E.2018\/1627, K. 2020\/131) iletilmek \u00fczere \u0130stanbul 15. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesine (E.2017\/96, K.2018\/93) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucuya net 30.000 TL manevi tazminat \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE, tazminata ili\u015fkin di\u011fer taleplerin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 18.800 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 19.246,90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. \u00d6demelerin 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 11\/6\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 11\/6\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/12145 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 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 R\u00dcSTEM BOZKURT BATUM BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/12145) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 11\/6\/2024 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Recai AKYEL \u00a0 \u00a0 Selahaddin MENTE\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 Muhterem \u0130NCE \u00a0 \u00a0 Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Ekin \u00c7ANKAL Ba\u015fvurucu : R\u00fcstem Bozkurt BATUM Vekili : Av. Sevgi KALAN G\u00dcVERC\u0130N \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, Twitter hesab\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan payla\u015f\u0131m sebebiyle aleyhe manevi tazminata h\u00fckmedilmesinin ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ihlal etti\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucu; \u00fclke genelinde tan\u0131nan gazeteci, yazar ve televizyoncudur. Y\u00fcz bini a\u015fk\u0131n takip\u00e7isi bulunan ba\u015fvurucu, ki\u015fisel Twitter hesab\u0131ndan hukuki ve siyasi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015flerinipayla\u015fmaktad\u0131r. Estetik Yay\u0131n A.\u015e.ye (davac\u0131) ait S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi ise 27\/7\/2007 tarihinde kurulmu\u015f olup kendisini Atat\u00fcrk\u00e7\u00fc, ulusal ve sek\u00fcler \u00e7izgide tan\u0131mlamaktad\u0131r. Mezk\u00fbr gazete, olaylar\u0131n meydana geldi\u011fi tarihte \u00fclke genelinde en \u00e7ok tiraj\u0131 olan gazetelerden biridir. 3. S\u00f6zc\u00fc gazetesi 25\/6\/2015 tarihinde “Her partiden, her g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015ften milletvekillerine \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131: Atat\u00fcrk’\u00fcn Kurdu\u011fu Bu Cumhuriyet’in De\u011ferini Bilin” \u015feklinde bir man\u015fet atm\u0131\u015f, haberin i\u00e7eri\u011finde ise K\u00fcrt vekil, \u0130slamc\u0131 vekil, Ermeni vekil, Roman vekil, Ezidi vekil ba\u015fl\u0131klar\u0131 alt\u0131nda be\u015f ayr\u0131 milletvekilinin ismi, soy ismi ve foto\u011fraflar\u0131n\u0131 yay\u0131mlayarak, “Cumhuriyet sayesinde dil, din, \u0131rk, g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f ayr\u0131m\u0131 olmadan herkes her mevkiye gelebiliyor, \u00fclke y\u00f6netiminde yer …<\/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-21258","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n