T\u00dcRK\u0130YE CUMHUR\u0130YET\u0130<\/p>\n
ANAYASA MAHKEMES\u0130<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
D.S VE N.B.S. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/32560)<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 7\/1\/2025<\/p>\n
B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM<\/p>\n
KARAR<\/p>\n
G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN<\/p>\n
\u00dcyeler<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Recai AKYEL<\/p>\n
Selahaddin MENTE\u015e<\/p>\n
Muhterem \u0130NCE<\/p>\n
Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L<\/p>\n
Raport\u00f6r<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Duygu BAKAY<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
1. D.S<\/p>\n
2. N.B.S<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. Caner CANLI<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru; 8\/3\/2012 tarihli ve 6284 say\u0131l\u0131 Ailenin Korunmas\u0131 ve Kad\u0131na Kar\u015f\u0131 \u015eiddetin \u00d6nlenmesine Dair Kanun uyar\u0131nca verilen tedbir karar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik esasl\u0131 iddialar\u0131n itiraz mercii taraf\u0131ndan kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n, tedbir karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullan\u0131lamamas\u0131 nedeniyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, ba\u015fvurucular hakk\u0131nda \u015fiddet uygulayan ifadesinin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle de masumiyet karinesinin ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucular ayr\u0131ca tedbir karar\u0131 s\u00fcrecinde D.S. hakk\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir isnad\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n \u015fahsili\u011fi ilkesinin; uygulanan tedbirin mahiyeti gere\u011fimaddi ve manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve seyahat h\u00fcrriyetinin ihlal edildi\u011finden de yak\u0131nmaktad\u0131rlar.<\/p>\n
3. Ba\u015fvurucular, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 10\/9\/2020 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde 12\/10\/2020 tarihinde tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuru, gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 ve masumiyet karinesi y\u00f6nlerinden incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
A. Gerek\u00e7eli Karar Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucular, 6284 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun uyar\u0131nca verilen tedbir karar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik esasl\u0131 iddialar\u0131n\u0131n itiraz mercii taraf\u0131ndan kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvuruya konu olayda lehine tedbir istenen ma\u011fdurun, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n hakaretine, tehdidine, huzur ve s\u00fckununu bozmas\u0131na maruz kald\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131nda bulundu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Bu kapsamda yarg\u0131 mercilerince ma\u011fdur taraf\u0131n korunabilmesi i\u00e7in 6284 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un baz\u0131 h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin tedbiren uygulanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015f; ancak dosyaya sunulan delillerle sonu\u00e7 aras\u0131nda ne \u015fekilde ba\u011f kuruldu\u011funun, gerek\u00e7esiz olarak verilen tedbir karar\u0131na yap\u0131lan itiraz\u0131n neden reddedildi\u011finin asgari d\u00fczeyde dahi a\u00e7\u0131klanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
6. Anayasa Mahkemesi gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden olay ve olgular\u0131 somut ba\u015fvuru ile benzer iddialar\u0131 Salih S\u00f6ylemezo\u011flu (B. No: 2013\/3758, 6\/1\/2016) ve Erdal T\u00fcrkmen (B. No: 2016\/2100, 4\/4\/2019) kararlar\u0131nda incelemi\u015f ve uygulanacak ilkeleri belirlemi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan kararlarda, Anayasa’da g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 gere\u011fi itiraz merciince ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n beyan ve delillerinin etkili bir \u015fekilde incelenmesi ve kar\u015f\u0131lanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi belirtilerek s\u00f6z konusu y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn yerine getirilmemesi nedeniyle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine h\u00fckmedilmi\u015ftir. Somut ba\u015fvuruda, an\u0131lan kararlarda a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Di\u011fer taraftan bu ihlal karar\u0131n\u0131n davan\u0131n sonucuyla ilgili herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirme i\u00e7ermedi\u011fi vurgulanmal\u0131d\u0131r. Zira gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131, taraflara yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fckleri iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kurallara uygun bi\u00e7imde incelenip incelenmedi\u011fini bilmelerine imk\u00e2n sa\u011flayan bir hak olup yarg\u0131lama sonucuna y\u00f6nelik bir teminat sa\u011flamaz. Bu itibarla Anayasa Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da belirtti\u011fi ihlal gerek\u00e7elerini g\u00f6zeterek ve s\u00f6z konusu iddiayla ilgili olarak yeniden bir de\u011ferlendirme yaparak gereken karar\u0131 vermek yine yarg\u0131lama mercilerinin takdirindedir.<\/p>\n
8. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle Anayasa’n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Masumiyet Karinesinin \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia<\/p>\n
9. Ba\u015fvurucular, kolluk evrak\u0131nda “\u015fiddet uygulayan” ifadesinin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle masumiyet karinesinin ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
10. Masumiyet karinesinin medeni hak ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fckler kapsam\u0131nda kalan bir yarg\u0131lamada uygulanabilmesi i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6z konusu medeni yarg\u0131lama ile hakk\u0131nda y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen veya sona eren ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 aras\u0131nda ba\u011flant\u0131 bulundu\u011funu g\u00f6stermesi gerekmektedir. Medeni hak yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda, ceza yarg\u0131lamas\u0131nda verilen karar\u0131n sonucunun dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fi veya ceza dosyas\u0131nda yer alan delillerin irdelendi\u011fi ya da ba\u015fvurucunun hakk\u0131ndaki su\u00e7lamay\u0131 do\u011furan olaylara dahli ile ilgili irdelemelerde bulunuldu\u011fu veyahut ba\u015fvurucunun muhtemel su\u00e7lulu\u011fuyla ilgili yorum yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2llerde, s\u00f6z konusu ba\u011flant\u0131n\u0131n var oldu\u011fu kabul edilebilir (S.M. [GK], B. No: 2016\/6038, 20\/6\/2019, \u00a7 38).<\/p>\n
11. Somut ba\u015fvuruda 6284 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen tedbir s\u00fcrecinin ceza soru\u015fturmas\u0131na veya kovu\u015fturmas\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, lehine tedbir verilenin talebi \u00fczerine ba\u015flat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Ba\u015fvuru dosyas\u0131nda, ba\u015fvuru konusu karar\u0131n verildi\u011fi tedbir yarg\u0131lamas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda kalan fiillerle ilgili olarak ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda ceza soru\u015fturmas\u0131 ba\u015flat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair herhangi bir bilgi bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
12. Medeni hak ve y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011fe ili\u015fkin olan somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k kapsam\u0131nda verilen kararda kullan\u0131lan ifadelerin -ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 bir ceza davas\u0131\/soru\u015fturmas\u0131 bulunmamas\u0131 nedeniyle- masumiyet karinesi kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan masumiyet karinesinin ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131n\u0131n konu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yetkisizlik nedeniyle kabul edilemez bulunmas\u0131 gerekmektedir.<\/p>\n
C. Ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z ve Tarafs\u0131z Mahkemede Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia <\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucular; Ankara Bat\u0131 1. Aile Mahkemesi ile 2. Aile Mahkemesinin yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, tedbir devam ederken ayn\u0131 esas \u00fczerinden tekrar m\u00fckerrer tedbir karar\u0131 verildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015f ve bu kapsamda ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z ve tarafs\u0131z bir mahkemede yarg\u0131lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 iddia etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
14. 30\/3\/2011 tarihli ve 6216 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 48. maddesinin (2) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun ba\u015fvurular\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesince kabul edilemezli\u011fine karar verilebilece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda ba\u015fvurucunun ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131 kan\u0131tlayamad\u0131\u011f\u0131, temel haklara y\u00f6nelik bir m\u00fcdahalenin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 veya m\u00fcdahalenin me\u015fru oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131k olan ba\u015fvurular ile karma\u015f\u0131k veya zorlama \u015fik\u00e2yetlerden ibaret ba\u015fvurular a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun kabul edilebilir (Hikmet Balabano\u011flu, B. No: 2012\/1334, 17\/9\/2013, \u00a7 24).<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n yetkisizlik iddias\u0131n\u0131 ilgili mahkemelere y\u00f6neltmedi\u011fi, iddia ve itirazlar\u0131na ili\u015fkin yeterli inceleme yap\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun yukar\u0131da gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcyle ele al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu iddian\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131zl\u0131k ve tarafs\u0131zl\u0131\u011fa delalet edemeyece\u011fi, bunun d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu mahkemelerin neden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z ve tarafs\u0131z olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin iddialar\u0131n\u0131 somutla\u015ft\u0131ramad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu iddian\u0131n temellendirilememi\u015f \u015fik\u00e2yet kapsam\u0131nda kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
16. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun bu k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer kabul edilebilirlik ko\u015fullar\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden incelenmeksizin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
D. Di\u011fer \u0130hlal \u0130ddialar\u0131<\/p>\n
17. Su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n \u015fahsili\u011fi ilkesi, ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131 ile maddi ve manevi b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve seyahat \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131n\u0131n, gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 ba\u011flam\u0131nda adil yarg\u0131lama hakk\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ihlal sonucuna ula\u015f\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle incelenmesine gerek g\u00f6r\u00fclmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
III. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
18. Ba\u015fvurucular, ihlalin tespiti, yeniden yarg\u0131lama ile tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur. 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). Yeniden yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yeterli bir giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011fundan 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\u015fvurucular\u0131n kimliklerinin gizli tutulmas\u0131 talebinin KABUL\u00dcNE,<\/p>\n
B. 1. Masumiyet karinesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n konu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yetkisizlik nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z ve tarafs\u0131z mahkemede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
3. Gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
C. Su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n \u015fahsili\u011fi ilkesi, ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131 ile maddi ve manevi b\u00fct\u00fcnl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve seyahat \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesine YER OLMADI\u011eINA,<\/p>\n
D. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 36. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak amac\u0131yla Ankara Bat\u0131 2. Aile Mahkemesine (E.2022\/233 D.\u0130\u015f, K.2020\/233- E.2020\/232 D.\u0130\u015f, K.2020\/232) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. Tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. 446,90 TL har\u00e7 ve 30.000 TL vek\u00e2let \u00fccretinden olu\u015fan toplam 30.446,90 TL yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvuruculara M\u00dc\u015eTEREKEN \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
H. \u00d6demelerin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n 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
\u0130. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 7\/1\/2025 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 7\/1\/2025 tarihli ve 2020\/32560 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 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR D.S VE N.B.S. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/32560) Karar Tarihi: 7\/1\/2025 B\u0130R\u0130NC\u0130 B\u00d6L\u00dcM KARAR G\u0130ZL\u0130L\u0130K TALEB\u0130 KABUL Ba\u015fkan : Hasan Tahsin G\u00d6KCAN \u00dcyeler : Recai AKYEL Selahaddin MENTE\u015e Muhterem \u0130NCE Y\u0131lmaz AK\u00c7\u0130L Raport\u00f6r : Duygu BAKAY Ba\u015fvurucular : 1. D.S 2. N.B.S Vekili : Av. Caner CANLI I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru; 8\/3\/2012 tarihli ve 6284 say\u0131l\u0131 Ailenin Korunmas\u0131 ve Kad\u0131na Kar\u015f\u0131 \u015eiddetin \u00d6nlenmesine Dair Kanun uyar\u0131nca verilen tedbir karar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik esasl\u0131 iddialar\u0131n itiraz mercii taraf\u0131ndan kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n, tedbir karar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131 kullan\u0131lamamas\u0131 nedeniyle savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n, ba\u015fvurucular hakk\u0131nda \u015fiddet uygulayan ifadesinin kullan\u0131lmas\u0131 nedeniyle de masumiyet karinesinin ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucular ayr\u0131ca tedbir karar\u0131 s\u00fcrecinde D.S. hakk\u0131nda hi\u00e7bir isnad\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 belirterek su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n \u015fahsili\u011fi ilkesinin; uygulanan tedbirin mahiyeti gere\u011fimaddi ve manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131 ile ki\u015fi h\u00fcrriyeti ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve seyahat h\u00fcrriyetinin ihlal edildi\u011finden de yak\u0131nmaktad\u0131rlar. 3. Ba\u015fvurucular, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 10\/9\/2020 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde 12\/10\/2020 tarihinde tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur. Ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvuru, gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 ve masumiyet karinesi y\u00f6nlerinden incelenmi\u015ftir. II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME A. Gerek\u00e7eli Karar Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia 4. Ba\u015fvurucular, 6284 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun uyar\u0131nca verilen …<\/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-101748","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n