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
M.K. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/6675)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 24\/10\/2024<\/p>\n
\u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Engin YILDIRIM<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
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
Ali Erdem \u015eAH\u0130N<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. R\u0131dvan ALP<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, ki\u015fisel verilerin g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131na esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. 1990 do\u011fumlu olan ba\u015fvurucu, 72. d\u00f6nem devlet hizmet y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kuras\u0131 sonucuna g\u00f6re Mardin Maz\u0131da\u011f\u0131 Devlet Hastanesine hekim olarak yerle\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda 3\/10\/2016 tarihli ve 676 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’nin 74. maddesiyle 14\/7\/1965 tarihli ve 657 say\u0131l\u0131 Devlet Memurlar\u0131 Kanunu\u2019nun 48. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (A) bendine eklenen ve 1\/2\/2018 tarihli ve 7070 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararnamenin De\u011fi\u015ftirilerek Kabul Edilmesine Dair Kanun’un 60. maddesiyle aynen kabul edilen (8) numaral\u0131 alt bent uyar\u0131nca g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 yapt\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu ara\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n olumsuz sonu\u00e7lanmas\u0131 nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun yerle\u015fmeye hak kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 kamu kurumuna atamas\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucu, an\u0131lan i\u015flemin iptali istemiyle idare mahkemesine ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. \u0130lk derece mahkemesi ba\u015fvurucunun yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir sosyal medya payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131’na hakaret su\u00e7undan yarg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, ceza mahkemesinin ba\u015fvurucu aleyhine h\u00fckm\u00fcn a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131n\u0131n geri b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131 karar\u0131 verdi\u011fini, s\u00f6z konusu payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n devlet memuruna yak\u0131\u015fmayacak nitelikte oldu\u011funu, bu durumun ba\u015fvurucunun kamu g\u00f6revine atanmas\u0131na engel te\u015fkil edebilecek hukuken kabul edilebilir somut ve ge\u00e7erli bir neden oldu\u011funu kabul ederek davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan karar istinaf kanun yolunda kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai karar\u0131 15\/12\/2019 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 14\/1\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
6. 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
7. 7\/4\/2021 tarihli ve 7315 say\u0131l\u0131 G\u00fcvenlik Soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve Ar\u015fiv Ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 Kanunu 17\/4\/2021 tarihli ve 31455 say\u0131l\u0131 Resm\u00ee Gazete’de yay\u0131mlanarak y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girmi\u015f; 26\/10\/1994 tarihli ve 4045 say\u0131l\u0131 G\u00fcvenlik Soru\u015fturmas\u0131, Baz\u0131 Nedenlerle G\u00f6revlerine Son Verilen Kamu Personeli ile Kamu G\u00f6revine Al\u0131nmayanlar\u0131n Haklar\u0131n\u0131n Geri Verilmesine ve 1402 Numaral\u0131 S\u0131k\u0131y\u00f6netim Kanununda De\u011fi\u015fiklik Yap\u0131lmas\u0131na \u0130li\u015fkin Kanun’u y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckten kald\u0131rm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 7315 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe girdi\u011fi tarihten itibaren ki\u015filerin g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 bu Kanun kapsam\u0131nda yap\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
8. Ba\u015fvurucu; yarg\u0131lama s\u00fcrecinde adli yarg\u0131da verilen karar \u00fczerinden bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131larak davan\u0131n reddedilmesinin masumiyet karinesini, sosyal medya payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131n\u0131n ele\u015ftiri s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131 i\u00e7inde kalmas\u0131na ra\u011fmen atamas\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lmamas\u0131n\u0131n ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, Anayasa Mahkemesinin g\u00fcvelik soru\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n dayana\u011f\u0131 kural\u0131 iptal etmesine ra\u011fmen istinaf karar\u0131nda bu konunun dikkate al\u0131nmamas\u0131n\u0131n ve karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esiz olmas\u0131n\u0131n adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131 ihlal etti\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde; kamu hizmetinin daha sa\u011fl\u0131kl\u0131 ve etkin \u015fekilde s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclebilmesinin sa\u011flanmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla k\u0131s\u0131tlay\u0131c\u0131 y\u00f6nde getirilen tedbirler nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6zel hayat\u0131na y\u00f6nelen bir m\u00fcdahale olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, ba\u015fvurucunun kamu g\u00f6revine atanmamas\u0131na ili\u015fkin i\u015flemin iseonun \u00f6zel hayat\u0131nda ciddi olumsuz etkiler yaratmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususlar\u0131n\u0131n yap\u0131lacak incelemede dikkate al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilmi\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
9. Ba\u015fvurucunun kendisi hakk\u0131ndaki g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131yla elde edilen verilerin ki\u015fisel veri oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r (Fatih Saraman [GK], B. No: 2014\/7256, 27\/2\/2019, \u00a7 57; Turgut Duman, B. No: 2014\/15365, 29\/5\/2019, \u00a7 58). Ba\u015fvurunun temelinde kendisi hakk\u0131nda elde edilen ki\u015fisel verilerin kamu makamlar\u0131na a\u00e7\u0131klanmas\u0131 ve g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmalar\u0131nda kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 hususu bulunmaktad\u0131r. Ki\u015fisel verilerin tutulmas\u0131n\u0131n, saklanmas\u0131n\u0131n veya aktar\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinin \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131nda g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekir. Bu nedenle ba\u015fvurular\u0131n \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 i\u00e7inde yer alan ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilmektedir (benzer y\u00f6nde yap\u0131lan inceleme ve de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Fatih Saraman, \u00a7 57; Turgut Duman, \u00a7 58; Abdurrahim Kaya ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2019\/12271, 3\/12\/2020, \u00a7 19).<\/p>\n
10. 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 kapsam\u0131ndaki ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
11. Anayasa Mahkemesi bir \u00e7ok karar\u0131nda kanunilik ilkesinin bir gere\u011fi olarak temel hak ve h\u00fcrriyetlerin s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin kanunlar\u0131n ta\u015f\u0131mas\u0131 gereken \u00f6zellikleri incelemi\u015ftir. Buna g\u00f6re m\u00fcdahalenin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan kanunun, y\u00f6neldi\u011fi konuyla ilgili temel esaslar\u0131, ilkeleri ve genel \u00e7er\u00e7eveyi belirlemesi gerekti\u011fi, ancak uygulama ko\u015fullar\u0131 ve usule ili\u015fkin detaylar\u0131n d\u00fczenleyici i\u015flemlere b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn oldu\u011fu ifade edilmi\u015ftir. (\u00e7ok say\u0131da karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. Halime Sare Aysal [GK], B. No: 2013\/1789, 11\/11\/2015, \u00a7 62-66). Konu ki\u015fisel verilerin kay\u0131t, muhafaza ve kullan\u0131m\u0131n\u0131 i\u00e7eren tedbirler oldu\u011funda ise kanunun ve ilgili d\u00fczenleyici i\u015flemin an\u0131lan tedbirlerin kapsam\u0131n\u0131, uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 d\u00fczenleyen ve \u00f6zellikle s\u00fcre, stoklama, kullan\u0131m, \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filerin eri\u015fimi, verilerin gizlili\u011fi, b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve imhas\u0131 konusundaki usullere ili\u015fkin olan, muhataplar\u0131n\u0131n yetki a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 ve keyf\u00eeli\u011fe kar\u015f\u0131 yeteri kadar g\u00fcvenceye sahip olmalar\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayacak a\u00e7\u0131k ve detayl\u0131 kurallar\u0131 i\u00e7ermesi gerekti\u011fi vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Nitekim Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00e7ok say\u0131da ba\u015fvuruda m\u00fcdahalenin dayana\u011f\u0131 kural\u0131n s\u00f6z\u00fc edilen ko\u015fullar\u0131 ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuyla kanunilik y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ihlal kararlar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir (Fatih Saraman, \u00a7\u00a7 88-90; Turgut Duman, \u00a7 88; Abdurrahim Kaya ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 28; S\u00fcleyman Akif Nazl\u0131g\u00fcl, B. No: 2018\/31982, 15\/6\/2021, \u00a7 33).<\/p>\n
12. \u00d6te yandan 7070 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 60. maddesi ile 657 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 48. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (A) bendine eklenen (8) numaral\u0131 alt bendin iptali istemiyle 114 milletvekili taraf\u0131ndan 3\/5\/2018 tarihinde Anayasa Mahkemesinde dava a\u00e7\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesi 24\/7\/2019 tarihli ve E.2018\/73, K.2019\/65 say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131yla ba\u015fvuruya konu olayda uygulanan kural\u0131, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 13., 20. ve 128. maddelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 g\u00f6rerek iptal etmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131n gerek\u00e7esinde g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131yla elde edilen verilerin ki\u015fisel veri niteli\u011finde oldu\u011funu, bu alanda d\u00fczenleme getiren kurallar\u0131n kamu makamlar\u0131na hangi ko\u015fullarda ve hangi s\u0131n\u0131rlar i\u00e7inde tedbirler uygulama ve \u00f6zel hayat\u0131n gizlili\u011fine y\u00f6nelik m\u00fcdahalelerde bulunma yetkisi verildi\u011fini yeterince a\u00e7\u0131k olarak g\u00f6stermesi ve olas\u0131 k\u00f6t\u00fcye kullanmalara kar\u015f\u0131 yeterli g\u00fcvenceleri sa\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini, kuralda ise g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve\/veya ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 yap\u0131lmas\u0131 memurlu\u011fa al\u0131mlarda genel \u015fartlar aras\u0131nda say\u0131lmas\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131n g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131na ve ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131na konu edilecek bilgi ve belgelerin neler oldu\u011funa, bu bilgilerin ne \u015fekilde kullan\u0131laca\u011f\u0131na, hangi mercilerin soru\u015fturma ve ara\u015ft\u0131rmay\u0131 yapaca\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin herhangi bir d\u00fczenleme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirtmi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla Anayasa Mahkemesinin bireysel ba\u015fvuru incelemesinde benimsedi\u011fi ve yukar\u0131da de\u011finilen inceleme y\u00f6ntemini norm denetiminde verdi\u011fi iptal karar\u0131yla da s\u00fcrd\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r (bkz. \u00a7 11).<\/p>\n
13. Nihayetinde somut olayda ba\u015fvurucunun7070 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 60. maddesi ile 657 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 48. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (A) bendine eklenen (8) numaral\u0131 alt bendinde belirtilen d\u00fczenlemeler esas al\u0131narak yap\u0131lan g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131n\u0131n olumsuz sonu\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan bahisle yerle\u015ftirilmesinin yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, yukar\u0131da belirtilen ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektirir bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re ba\u015fvuruya konu m\u00fcdahalenin dayana\u011f\u0131 olan d\u00fczenlemenin kanunilik \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131lmaktad\u0131r. \u00d6te yandan ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7 g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde s\u00f6z konusu m\u00fcdahale a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan di\u011fer g\u00fcvence \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerine riayet edilip edilmedi\u011finin ayr\u0131ca de\u011ferlendirilmesine gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir (benzer de\u011ferlendirmeler i\u00e7in bkz. Orhan \u00d6zkan ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2019\/19102, 4\/10\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 8-19; Hatip \u0130mir, B. No: 2019\/30759, 28\/2\/2024, \u00a7 15).<\/p>\n
14. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M <\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti, yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131 ile birlikte 300.000 TL maddi ve 200.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
16. 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 (30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesinin Kurulu\u015fu ve Yarg\u0131lama Usulleri Hakk\u0131nda Kanun’un 50. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda d\u00fczenlenen bireysel ba\u015fvuruya \u00f6zg\u00fc yeniden yarg\u0131lama kurumunun \u00f6zelliklerine ili\u015fkin kapsaml\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar i\u00e7in 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
17. Yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere dosyan\u0131n yetkili yarg\u0131 merciine g\u00f6nderilmesine karar verilmesinin ihlal iddias\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan yeterli giderim sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat talebinin reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
IV. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. \u00d6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 20. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
C. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Ankara 12. \u0130dare Mahkemesine (E:2017\/3255, K:2018\/2261) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
D. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.446,90 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 24\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 24\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/6675 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 M.K. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/6675) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 24\/10\/2024 \u0130K\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM \u00a0 KARAR \u00a0 \u00a0 Ba\u015fkan : Basri BA\u011eCI \u00dcyeler : Engin YILDIRIM \u00a0 \u00a0 R\u0131dvan G\u00dcLE\u00c7 \u00a0 \u00a0 Kenan YA\u015eAR \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00d6mer \u00c7INAR Raport\u00f6r : Ali Erdem \u015eAH\u0130N Ba\u015fvurucu : Vekili : Av. R\u0131dvan ALP \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru, ki\u015fisel verilerin g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131na esas al\u0131nmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zel hayata sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki ki\u015fisel verilerin korunmas\u0131n\u0131 isteme hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. 1990 do\u011fumlu olan ba\u015fvurucu, 72. d\u00f6nem devlet hizmet y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kuras\u0131 sonucuna g\u00f6re Mardin Maz\u0131da\u011f\u0131 Devlet Hastanesine hekim olarak yerle\u015ftirilmi\u015ftir. 3. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda 3\/10\/2016 tarihli ve 676 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararname’nin 74. maddesiyle 14\/7\/1965 tarihli ve 657 say\u0131l\u0131 Devlet Memurlar\u0131 Kanunu\u2019nun 48. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131n\u0131n (A) bendine eklenen ve 1\/2\/2018 tarihli ve 7070 say\u0131l\u0131 Ola\u011fan\u00fcst\u00fc Hal Kapsam\u0131nda Baz\u0131 D\u00fczenlemeler Yap\u0131lmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun H\u00fckm\u00fcnde Kararnamenin De\u011fi\u015ftirilerek Kabul Edilmesine Dair Kanun’un 60. maddesiyle aynen kabul edilen (8) numaral\u0131 alt bent uyar\u0131nca g\u00fcvenlik soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ve ar\u015fiv ara\u015ft\u0131rmas\u0131 yapt\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu ara\u015ft\u0131rman\u0131n olumsuz sonu\u00e7lanmas\u0131 nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucunun yerle\u015fmeye hak kazand\u0131\u011f\u0131 kamu kurumuna atamas\u0131 yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 4. Ba\u015fvurucu, an\u0131lan i\u015flemin iptali istemiyle idare mahkemesine ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftur. …<\/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-24166","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber","category-uncategorized-tr"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n