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
\u015e. T. BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2019\/5316)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 27\/11\/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
Murat BA\u015ePINAR<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucu<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan verilen mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc nedeniyle su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ve di\u011fer anayasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvuru 12\/2\/2019tarihinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
III. OLAY VE OLGULAR<\/p>\n
5. Ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u015fekliyle ilgili olaylar \u00f6zetle \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
6. 1981 do\u011fumlu olan ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcyesi oldu\u011fu \u015f\u00fcphesiyle Malatya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nca (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve Malatya 1. Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011finin 9\/12\/2016 tarihli karar\u0131yla tutuklama tedbiri uygulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
7. Soru\u015fturma neticesinde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 12\/4\/2017 tarihli iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. \u0130ddianamede ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 i\u00e7inde yer alan \u015fah\u0131slarla \u00f6rg\u00fctsel nitelikte toplant\u0131lara kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, hakk\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY ile ba\u011flant\u0131l\u0131 oldu\u011fu y\u00f6n\u00fcnde verilen ifadelerin bulundu\u011fu, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn finans aya\u011f\u0131 olan Bank Asya isimli bankada bulunan hesab\u0131nda kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn yay\u0131n organ\u0131 olan Zaman gazetesinde 157 adet abone referans kayd\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu ve an\u0131lan ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn bas\u0131n ve yay\u0131n organlar\u0131n\u0131n kapat\u0131lmas\u0131 ile ilgili olarak Malatya Adliyesi yan\u0131nda yap\u0131lan protesto g\u00f6sterilerine kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddialar\u0131na dayan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
8. Malatya 1. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) g\u00f6r\u00fclen davada duru\u015fma haz\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131 i\u015flemleri 28\/4\/2017 tarihinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Tensip Tutana\u011f\u0131’nda ba\u015fvurucuyla ilgili delillerin toplanmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik yaz\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n ve duru\u015fman\u0131n ilk celsesinin 23\/6\/2017 tarihinde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Duru\u015fman\u0131n ilk celsesinde duru\u015fma salonunda haz\u0131r bulunan ba\u015fvurucu, savunmas\u0131n\u0131 bizzat yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu savunmas\u0131nda \u00e7e\u015fitli \u015firketlere ba\u011fl\u0131 yurt ve okullarda idareci olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu d\u00f6nemlerde maa\u015flar\u0131n\u0131 belirtilen bankadan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bankac\u0131l\u0131k i\u015flemlerini orada y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, faizsiz bankac\u0131l\u0131k oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in birikimlerini de orada de\u011ferlendirdi\u011fini ve \u00f6rg\u00fct liderinin talimat\u0131yla i\u015flem yapmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, gazete aboneli\u011finin bulundu\u011funu ancak ba\u015fka kimseye abone olmas\u0131 i\u00e7in referans olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bir k\u0131s\u0131m dernek \u00fcyeli\u011finin bulundu\u011funu ve 2012 y\u0131l\u0131 sonunda da \u00fcyelikten istifa etti\u011fini, hakk\u0131nda beyanda bulunanlar\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck bir k\u0131sm\u0131n\u0131 tan\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 beyan etmi\u015f ve su\u00e7lamalar\u0131 kabul etmemi\u015ftir. Ayn\u0131 duru\u015fmada dosyaya gelen bilgi ve belgeler ba\u015fvurucuya okunmu\u015f, celse aras\u0131 banka kay\u0131tlar\u0131 geldi\u011finde dosyan\u0131n bilirki\u015fiye tevdi edilmesi ve eksik olan hususlar\u0131n giderilmesine y\u00f6nelik ara kararlar al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
10. Duru\u015fman\u0131n ikinci celsesinde dosyaya gelen belgelerle birlikte Bank Asya’yla ilgili belgeler ve bu konuda al\u0131nan bilirki\u015fi raporu ba\u015fvurucuya okunmu\u015f, dijital materyallerle ilgili gerekli incelemeler sonucu haz\u0131rlanacak raporun g\u00f6nderilmesine y\u00f6nelik yeniden karar al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Al\u0131nan bilirki\u015fi raporunda ba\u015fvurucunun y\u0131llara g\u00f6re a\u00e7\u0131lan ve kullan\u0131lan hesaplar\u0131 ve bu hesaplardaki art\u0131\u015f ve azal\u0131\u015flara ili\u015fkin tablolar haz\u0131rlanarak dosyaya eklenmi\u015ftir. Mahkemece \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc celsede de eksikliklerin giderilmesi ve delillerin toplanmas\u0131na y\u00f6nelik \u00f6nceki celse al\u0131nan karalar yinelenmi\u015ftir. Dijital materyallerle ilgili olarak \u00e7ok say\u0131da soru\u015fturma ve materyal olmas\u0131 nedenleriyle incelemelerin devam etti\u011fi Mahkemeye bildirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
11. 30\/11\/2017 tarihli son celsede iddia makam\u0131 dijital materyallerle ilgili cevap gelmeden esas hakk\u0131nda m\u00fctalaas\u0131n\u0131 sunmu\u015ftur. Mahkeme, ayn\u0131 celse ba\u015fvurucu ve m\u00fcdafiinin esas hakk\u0131nda m\u00fctalaaya kar\u015f\u0131 beyanlar\u0131n\u0131 ald\u0131ktan sonra ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan 7 y\u0131l 6 ay hapis cezas\u0131 ile mahk\u00fbmiyetine ve tutukluluk h\u00e2linin de devam\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Kararda ba\u015fvurucunun Bank Asya hesap hareketleri, FET\u00d6\/PDY iltisakl\u0131 olan okullarda idareci olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131, yine iltisakl\u0131 dernek \u00fcyeliklerinin bulunmas\u0131 ve gazete aboneli\u011fine ili\u015fkin referans kay\u0131tlar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik tespitler Mahkemece delil olarak h\u00fckme esas al\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7eli karar\u0131n ilgili k\u0131sm\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
“San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Bank Asya’da hesab\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, bu hesab\u0131n\u0131 aktif bir \u015fekilde kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2013\/01-04 ile 2013\/07-12 d\u00f6nemleri aras\u0131nda Malatya Kardelen \u00d6zel E\u011fitim \u0130n\u015f San ve Turz A.\u015e taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hesab\u0131na ‘M.K\u0131nay Yurdu’ maa\u015f \u00f6demesi i\u015flemi ile giri\u015f yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 , 2014\/10 d\u00f6neminde 1 adet cari mevduat hesap a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu hesab\u0131n 12\/07\/2016 tarihinde kullan\u0131ma kapat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2014\/09 ve 11 d\u00f6nemlerinde toplam 2 adet kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bu hesaplar\u0131n 09\/11\/2014 ile 29\/04\/2016 tarihlerinde kullan\u0131ma kapat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2014\/11 d\u00f6neminde kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131n\u0131n vadesinden \u00f6nce kapat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2014\/01-12 d\u00f6nemleri aras\u0131nda Malatya Kardelen \u00d6zel E\u011fitim \u0130n\u015f San ve Turz A\u015e taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hesab\u0131na ‘M.K\u0131nay Yurdu’ maa\u015f \u00f6demesi i\u015flemi ile hesaba giri\u015f kayd\u0131 yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, 2014 y\u0131l\u0131 9 ay\u0131nda hesab\u0131na y\u00fckl\u00fc miktarda para yat\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve hesab\u0131n\u0131n 25.315,92 TL oldu\u011fu, 2015\/01-12 ile 2016\/01-05 d\u00f6nemleri aras\u0131nda Malatya Kardelen \u00d6zel E\u011fitim \u0130n\u015f San ve Turz A.\u015e taraf\u0131ndan san\u0131\u011f\u0131n hesab\u0131na ‘M.K\u0131nay Yurdu’ maa\u015f \u00f6demesi i\u015flemi ile hesaba giri\u015f kayd\u0131 yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunun bilirki\u015fi marifetiyle anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Yine \u015f\u00fcphelinin al\u0131nan SGK kay\u0131t d\u00f6k\u00fcm\u00fcnden FET\u00d6\/PDY iltisakl\u0131 olan okullarda \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 13.01.2014-13.06.2016, 13.07.2013-18.12.2013tarihleri aras\u0131nda Malatya Kardelen \u00d6zel E\u011fitim \u0130n\u015f.San ve Tic.A.\u015e. de g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 13.12.2012-15.06.2013,18.12.2013-18.12.2013 tarihleri aras\u0131nda Hac\u0131 Bekirkarabekmez \u00d6\u011frenci Yurdunda g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131, 25.09.2007-23.11.2012 tarihleri aras\u0131nda \u00d6z Fetih \u00d6zel E\u011fitim A.\u015e’de g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
San\u0131\u011f\u0131n Zaman Gazetesinin trajin\u0131 art\u0131rmak al\u0131nan bilirki\u015fi raporunda da do\u011frulanan [N.S.], [H.B.], [A.A.] ve [E.\u00d6.] isimli \u015fah\u0131slara referans oldu\u011funun bildirildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
San\u0131\u011f\u0131n sendika\/dernek sorgulamas\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc ile iltisakl\u0131 olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kapat\u0131lan Arapgir Yard\u0131mla\u015fma ve E\u011fitim Derne\u011finin asil \u00fcyesi oldu\u011funun bildirildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
Yukardaki a\u00e7\u0131klamalardan sonra dosya k\u00fcl haline ele al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda; san\u0131\u011f\u0131n Bank Asya’da hesab\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, bu hesab\u0131n\u0131 aktif bir \u015fekilde kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc ele ba\u015f\u0131 Fetullah G\u00fclen’in \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131s\u0131 \u00fczerine hesab\u0131na 11\/09\/2014 tarihinde 20.000 TL’lik kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131, 09\/11\/2014 tarihinde vadesinden \u00f6nce kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131n\u0131 kapatt\u0131\u011f\u0131, yine ayn\u0131 tarihte 20.118,64 TL tutar\u0131nda kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131n\u0131n tekrar aktif hale getirildi\u011fi ve hesab\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, \u015f\u00fcphelinin al\u0131nan SGK d\u00f6k\u00fcmlerinde FET\u00d6\/PDY ile iltas\u0131kl\u0131 okullarda \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131, en son olarak 10\/09\/2014-31\/05\/2016 tarihleri aras\u0131nda Mustafa K\u0131nay Erkek \u00d6\u011frenci Yurdunda Kurum M\u00fcd\u00fcr\u00fc olarak g\u00f6rev yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr…”<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131ndaki h\u00fck\u00fcm, istinaf ve temyiz kanun yollar\u0131ndan ge\u00e7erek 29\/11\/2018 tarihinde kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, kesinle\u015fen cezas\u0131n\u0131n infaz\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda ceza infaz kurumundan 9\/7\/2021 tarihinde tahliye edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Ba\u015fvurucu, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 28\/1\/2019 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra yasal ba\u015fvuru s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde 12\/2\/2019 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
IV. \u0130LG\u0130L\u0130 HUKUK<\/p>\n
A. \u0130lgili Mevzuat<\/p>\n
14. \u0130lgili mevzuat i\u00e7in bkz. Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, B. No: 2019\/20791, 18\/10\/2022, \u00a7 9.<\/p>\n
B. Yarg\u0131tay Kararlar\u0131<\/p>\n
15. Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131 i\u00e7in bkz. Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7\u00a7 11-20; Serkan G\u00f6lge, B. No: 2019\/22453, 13\/9\/2022, \u00a7\u00a7 30-39; Raziye Ak\u00e7ay, B. No: 2019\/1665, 28\/6\/2022, \u00a7\u00a7 24, 27; G\u00fcrcan Bal\u0131k, B. No: 2020\/16435, 17\/11\/2022, \u00a7 46; Hakan Dar\u0131c\u0131 ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2021\/34045, 20\/7\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 13-21.<\/p>\n
V. \u0130NCELEME VE GEREK\u00c7E<\/p>\n
16. Anayasa Mahkemesinin 27\/11\/2024 tarihinde yapm\u0131\u015f oldu\u011fu toplant\u0131da ba\u015fvuru a\u015fa\u011f\u0131daki ba\u015fl\u0131klar alt\u0131nda incelenip gere\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fcld\u00fc:<\/p>\n
A. Su\u00e7ta ve Cezada Kanunilik \u0130lkesinin \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fine \u0130li\u015fkin \u0130ddia <\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u0130ddialar\u0131 ve Bakanl\u0131k G\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fc<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvurucu i\u015flendi\u011fi tarihte su\u00e7 olarak kabul edilmeyen fiillere dayan\u0131larak cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu, bu y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki iddia ve itirazlar\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k yarg\u0131 mercilerince yeterli a\u00e7\u0131klamalara yer verilmedi\u011fini belirterek su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesi ile adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
18. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnde \u00f6ncelikle ba\u015fvuruda kabul edilebilirlik \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lan\u0131p kar\u015f\u0131lanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi, kabul edilebilirlik \u015fartlar\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirilmesi h\u00e2linde Anayasa Mahkemesince daha \u00f6nce verilen kararlarda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere ba\u015fvurucunun \u015fik\u00e2yetinin esas\u0131 bak\u0131m\u0131ndan yap\u0131lacak incelemede Anayasa ve mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmleri do\u011frultusunda somut olay\u0131n kendine \u00f6zg\u00fc ko\u015fullar\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi ifade edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. De\u011ferlendirme<\/p>\n
19. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 38. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 \u015f\u00f6yledir:<\/p>\n
”Kimse, i\u015flendi\u011fi zaman y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan kanunun su\u00e7 saymad\u0131\u011f\u0131 bir fiilden dolay\u0131 cezaland\u0131r\u0131lamaz; kimseye su\u00e7u i\u015fledi\u011fi zaman kanunda o su\u00e7 i\u00e7in konulmu\u015f olan cezadan daha a\u011f\u0131r bir ceza verilemez.”<\/p>\n
20. Anayasa Mahkemesi, olaylar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucu taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan hukuki nitelendirmesi ile ba\u011fl\u0131 olmay\u0131p olay ve olgular\u0131n hukuki tavsifini kendisi takdir eder. Ba\u015fvurucunun fiilleri i\u015fledi\u011fi s\u0131rada cezai y\u00f6nden sorumluluk alt\u0131na sokulabilece\u011fini makul olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6remedi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesi kapsam\u0131nda incelenmesi gerekti\u011fi de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
a. Kabul Edilebilirlik Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
21. 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\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilir oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
b. Esas Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden<\/p>\n
i. Yarg\u0131tay ve Anayasa Mahkemesinin FET\u00d6\/PDY Ba\u011flam\u0131nda Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00dcye Olma Su\u00e7una \u0130li\u015fkin De\u011ferlendirmeleri<\/p>\n
22. FET\u00d6\/PDY, Fetullah G\u00fclen taraf\u0131ndan kurulan 1960’l\u0131 y\u0131llardan itibaren faaliyette bulunan ve uzun y\u0131llar boyunca din\u00ee bir grup olarak nitelenen bir yap\u0131lanmad\u0131r. Bu yap\u0131lanma; s\u00fcre\u00e7 i\u00e7inde “cemaat”, “G\u00fclen cemaati”, “Fetullah G\u00fclen cemaati”, “hizmet hareketi”, “g\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fcler hareketi” ve “camia” gibi isimlerle an\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Ayd\u0131n Yavuz ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2016\/22169, 20\/6\/2017, \u00a7 22). An\u0131lan yap\u0131lanma \u00f6zellikle kamu kurum ve kurulu\u015flar\u0131nda \u00f6rg\u00fctlenmi\u015f; bunun yan\u0131 s\u0131ra ba\u015fta e\u011fitim ve din olmak \u00fczere farkl\u0131 sosyal, k\u00fclt\u00fcrel ve ekonomik alanlarda yasal faaliyetlerde bulunmu\u015f; sivil alanda \u00f6nemli bir etkinli\u011fe ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bazen bu yasal kurulu\u015flar\u0131n i\u00e7inde gizlenen, bazen de yasal yap\u0131dan tamamen farkl\u0131 \u015fekilde konumlanan ve hareket eden \u00f6zellikle de kamusal alana y\u00f6nelik faaliyetlerde bulunan illegal bir yap\u0131lanma s\u00f6z konusudur (Ayd\u0131n Yavuz ve di\u011ferleri, \u00a7 26; Mustafa Bald\u0131r, B. No: 2016\/29354, 4\/4\/2018, \u00a7 75; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 44).<\/p>\n
23. FET\u00d6\/PDY ancak 2013 y\u0131l\u0131 sonras\u0131nda bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc olarak nitelendirilmi\u015f, \u00f6rg\u00fctlenmesine ve faaliyetlerine ili\u015fkin olarak bu tarihten sonra soru\u015fturma ve kovu\u015fturmalar yo\u011fun olarak y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr (adli makamlar taraf\u0131ndan FET\u00d6\/PDY mensubu olduklar\u0131 ve bu \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn faaliyetleri do\u011frultusunda \u00e7e\u015fitli su\u00e7lar i\u015fledikleri de\u011ferlendirilen ki\u015filer hakk\u0131nda ba\u015flat\u0131lan soru\u015fturmalara ve yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lamalara, devletin g\u00fcvenlik birimlerinin karar, a\u00e7\u0131klama ve uygulamalar\u0131na ili\u015fkin izahat i\u00e7in bkz. Adnan \u015een [GK], B. No: 2018\/8903, 15\/4\/2021, \u00a7\u00a7 13-25, 116; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 45).<\/p>\n
24. Yarg\u0131tay, k\u00f6kleri eskiye dayanmakla beraber ter\u00f6r ve devlet g\u00fcvenli\u011fi aleyhine faaliyetleri olduk\u00e7a yak\u0131n tarihlerde g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcr h\u00e2le gelen FET\u00d6\/PDY’ye \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unun olu\u015fup olu\u015fmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin de\u011ferlendirmelerinde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7una ili\u015fkin olarak -Anayasa Mahkemesinin Metin Birdal [GK], B. No: 2014\/15440, 22\/5\/2019) karar\u0131nda \u00f6zetledi\u011fi- \u00f6nceki i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131ndan ayr\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesi Metin Birdal karar\u0131nda, temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckler kapsam\u0131nda kalan birtak\u0131m eylemlerin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda delil olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesi hususunu incelemi\u015f, \u00f6zellikle ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7unun yap\u0131s\u0131na ve bu su\u00e7 ba\u011flam\u0131nda yar\u0131\u015fan de\u011ferler aras\u0131nda denge kurulmas\u0131na dair ayr\u0131nt\u0131l\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131klamalar yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Metin Birdal, \u00a7\u00a7 60-72).<\/p>\n
25. Anayasa Mahkemesi, yukar\u0131da yer verilen de\u011ferlendirmeleri, ilk olarak PKK ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan verilen mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan bir bireysel ba\u015fvuruda yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. S\u00f6z konusu incelemenin daha ba\u015f\u0131nda Anayasa Mahkemesi, bir kimsenin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbm edilmesi i\u00e7in “Ki\u015finin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn niteli\u011fini ve ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bilmesi, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olmay\u0131 istemesi ve \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hayatta kalmas\u0131na, ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesine devaml\u0131 bir irade ile katk\u0131 sa\u011flamas\u0131 gerekir.” \u015feklinde eldeki ba\u015fvurunun \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesinde de anahtar olan baz\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmelerde bulunmu\u015ftur. S\u00f6z konusu karar ve onu takip eden kararlarda \u00f6rg\u00fcte \u00fcye olman\u0131n “fiil\u00ee bir kat\u0131lma oldu\u011fu ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla \u00fcyeli\u011fin su\u00e7 olarak kabul edilmesinin ve cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131nda yatan sebebin, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyesi olan ki\u015finin asl\u0131nda bu \u015fekilde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn toplum i\u00e7in arz etti\u011fi tehlikeye bilerek ve isteyerek katk\u0131 sa\u011flamas\u0131 oldu\u011fu, ki\u015finin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131na bilerek ve isteyerek d\u00e2hil oldu\u011funun yeterli bir gerek\u00e7e ile ispat edilmesi gerekti\u011fini” ifade etmi\u015ftir (Metin Birdal, \u00a7\u00a7 62, 67; \u0130lhami Aksu, B. No: 2018\/36918, 15\/6\/2022, \u00a7 32; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 47).<\/p>\n
26. Nitekim Yarg\u0131tay da FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin PKK gibi olduk\u00e7a uzun s\u00fcredir mahkemelerce ve devlet kurumlar\u0131nca ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc olarak kabul edilen, toplum taraf\u0131ndan da \u00f6yle bilinen bir \u00f6rg\u00fct olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcnde bulundurmu\u015ftur. Yarg\u0131tay, bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin ba\u015flang\u0131\u00e7ta bir ahlak ve e\u011fitim hareketi olarak ortaya \u00e7\u0131kt\u0131\u011f\u0131, “s\u00f6zde me\u015fruiyetini sivil alanda dinden, kamusal alanda ise hukuktan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 izlenimi vermek i\u00e7in yeterli g\u00fcce ula\u015f\u0131ncaya kadar alenen kriminalize olmamaya \u00f6zen g\u00f6ster[di\u011fini]” ve toplumun her katman\u0131n\u0131n b\u00fcy\u00fck bir kesimi taraf\u0131ndan da b\u00f6yle alg\u0131land\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespitini yapm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ger\u00e7ekten de toplumda \u00f6nemli bir kesim, bu yap\u0131lanman\u0131n -illegal y\u00f6n\u00fcn\u00fc bilmeden- sosyal ve ekonomik alanda geli\u015ferek kurumsalla\u015fmas\u0131na ve faaliyetlerine destek olmu\u015ftur (Mustafa Bald\u0131r, \u00a7 76; Adnan \u015een, \u00a7\u00a7 117, 118; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7\u00a7 11-13, 19, 48).<\/p>\n
27. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla illegal y\u00f6n\u00fcn\u00fc bilerek \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyesi olan ki\u015filerle \u00f6yle olmayan s\u0131radan ki\u015filer aras\u0131nda dikkatli bir ayr\u0131m yapmak gerekmektedir. Fakat FET\u00d6\/PDY yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n\u0131n temelinde s\u00f6z konusu ayr\u0131m\u0131 yapman\u0131n zorlu\u011fu yatmaktad\u0131r. Bu zorlu\u011fun ilk nedeni ter\u00f6r yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n\u0131n bizzat do\u011fas\u0131, h\u00fckmedilen cezalar\u0131n a\u011f\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131, birey ve toplum hayat\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etki derecesinin y\u00fcksekli\u011fidir. Zorlu\u011fun ikinci sebebi ise FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin hukuk alan\u0131nda bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc olarak kabul edilmesi s\u00fcrecinden kaynaklanmaktad\u0131r. Bir\u00e7ok durumda yarg\u0131lamalara konu eylemler FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin hukuk alan\u0131nda bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc olarak kabul edilmesinden ve \u00fc\u00e7\u00fcnc\u00fc ki\u015filer i\u00e7in de bilinir h\u00e2le gelmesinden \u00f6nce i\u015flenmi\u015ftir (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 49).<\/p>\n
28. Bununla birlikte bir olu\u015fumun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc oldu\u011funa dair kesinle\u015fmi\u015f yarg\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n su\u00e7un unsurlar\u0131ndan biri olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n alt\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nemle \u00e7izmek gerekir. \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcn niteliklerinin mahkemece belirlenmesi bir tespit karar\u0131d\u0131r (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 14). Aksinin kabul\u00fc, hakk\u0131nda kesinle\u015fmi\u015f yarg\u0131 karar\u0131 bulunmayan ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fctlerinin eylemlerinin unsur yoklu\u011fu nedeniyle cezaland\u0131r\u0131lamamas\u0131 sonucunu do\u011furur. Yukar\u0131da al\u0131nt\u0131lanan Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131n\u0131n da g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi gibi bir olu\u015fumun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc olarak tespitine dair kesinle\u015fmi\u015f yarg\u0131 karar\u0131n\u0131n bu su\u00e7 \u00f6zelinde en \u00f6nemli fonksiyonu, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne hukuki varl\u0131k kazand\u0131rmas\u0131 ve bu ba\u011flamda yap\u0131n\u0131n bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc oldu\u011funu bilinebilecek h\u00e2le getirmesidir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla hen\u00fcz ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc oldu\u011funa dair yarg\u0131 kararlar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dolay\u0131s\u0131yla herkes\u00e7e bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc olarak bilinebilir h\u00e2le gelmedi\u011fi s\u0131rada bir \u00f6rg\u00fct ile irtibatl\u0131 ve iltisakl\u0131 olan ki\u015filerin kas\u0131tlar\u0131n\u0131n ortaya konulmas\u0131 hayati \u00f6nemdedir (Ahmet Aslan, B. No: 2021\/23949, 6\/10\/2022, \u00a7\u00a7 50-51; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 50).<\/p>\n
29. O h\u00e2lde bir kimsenin FET\u00d6\/PDY’ye \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131labilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn niteli\u011fini ve ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bildi\u011fi, \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olmay\u0131 istedi\u011fi ve \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn hayatta kalmas\u0131na, ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmesine devaml\u0131 bir irade ile katk\u0131 sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6sterilmesi gerekir. Bu gereklili\u011fin bir sonucu olarak Yarg\u0131tay ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma veya yard\u0131m etme su\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n do\u011frudan kas\u0131t ve \u00f6zel saikle i\u015flenebilen su\u00e7lar oldu\u011fu da g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin ger\u00e7ek y\u00fcz\u00fcn\u00fc ortaya koyan operasyonlara ba\u015fland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu yap\u0131n\u0131n kamuoyu ve medya taraf\u0131ndan tart\u0131\u015f\u0131l\u0131r h\u00e2le geldi\u011fini, \u00fcst d\u00fczey h\u00fck\u00fbmet yetkilileri ve kamu g\u00f6revlileri taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131klamalarda paralel yap\u0131 veya ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc oldu\u011funa ili\u015fkin tespitler ve uyar\u0131lar\u0131n yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, Mill\u00ee G\u00fcvenlik Kurulu taraf\u0131ndan da ayn\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmelerin payla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcre\u00e7ten \u00f6nce icra edilen faaliyetlerin nitelik, i\u00e7erik ve mahiyeti itibar\u0131yla ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn amac\u0131na hizmet etti\u011fi ve san\u0131klarca da bunun bilindi\u011fi somut delil ve olgularla ortaya konulmad\u0131k\u00e7a \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyet kapsam\u0131nda kabul edilemeyece\u011fini, ki\u015filerin hukuki durumlar\u0131n\u0131n kusurluluk ve hata ba\u011flam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmesinde zaruret bulundu\u011funu ifade etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fka bir deyi\u015fle Yarg\u0131tay bir ki\u015finin s\u00f6z konusu \u00f6rg\u00fcte \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in sempati ve iltisak boyutunu a\u015farak ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc niteli\u011fini ve ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bilerek \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyesi oldu\u011funu ispat etmeye yeterli delillere dayan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 \u015fart ko\u015fmaktad\u0131r (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7\u00a7 11-19, 51).<\/p>\n
30. Bu sebeple Yarg\u0131tay FET\u00d6\/PDY davalar\u0131nda da \u00f6rg\u00fcte sadece sempati duymay\u0131 ya da \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131, de\u011ferlerini, ideolojisini benimsemek, buna ili\u015fkin yay\u0131nlar\u0131 okumak, bulundurmak, \u00f6rg\u00fct liderine sayg\u0131 duymak gibi eylemleri ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyet i\u00e7in yeterli g\u00f6rmemektedir. Yarg\u0131taya g\u00f6re FET\u00d6\/PDY \u00fcyesinin (1) \u00f6rg\u00fcte bilerek ve isteyerek kat\u0131lmas\u0131, (2) kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn niteli\u011fini ve ama\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131 bilmesi, (3) ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn bir par\u00e7as\u0131 olmay\u0131 istemesi, (4) \u00f6rg\u00fcte kat\u0131lma iradesinin devaml\u0131l\u0131k arz etmesi, (5) saikinin su\u00e7 i\u015flemek olmas\u0131 \u015fart\u0131 aranmal\u0131d\u0131r (Yarg\u0131tay karar\u0131 i\u00e7in bkz. Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 13).<\/p>\n
31. Yukar\u0131daki de\u011ferlendirmelerden hareket eden ve FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin g\u00fcvenlik g\u00fc\u00e7lerince \u00f6nemli \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcde \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenen hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131lanmas\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6zeten Yarg\u0131tay; \u00fcst d\u00fczeyde bulunan \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn niteliklerini, ama\u00e7 ve y\u00f6ntemlerini bildi\u011finin, su\u00e7 i\u015flemek saiki ile hareket etti\u011finin, ayr\u0131ca \u00f6rg\u00fcte kat\u0131lma iradesinin devaml\u0131l\u0131k arz etti\u011finin kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fi sonucuna varm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay, FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin olduk\u00e7a uzun s\u00fcre yasal zeminde faaliyet g\u00f6stermesi ve nihai amac\u0131n\u0131 gizli tutmas\u0131 nedeniyle \u00f6zellikle ki\u015filerin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn nihai amac\u0131n\u0131 bildi\u011finin ortaya konmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fini kabul etmi\u015ftir (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7\u00a7 11-13, 19; ayr\u0131ca bkz. Adnan \u015een, \u00a7 114).<\/p>\n
32. Yarg\u0131 makamlar\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirmelerinden \u00e7\u0131kan sonuca g\u00f6re FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin daha alt katlar\u0131yla irtibatl\u0131 oldu\u011fu tespit eden ki\u015filerin -\u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn nihai amac\u0131n\u0131 bildikleri ortaya konmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 m\u00fcddet\u00e7e- \u00f6rg\u00fcte bir ahlak ve e\u011fitim hareketi, g\u00f6n\u00fcll\u00fcler hareketi, din\u00ee bir cemaat oldu\u011fu zann\u0131 ile sempati duyduklar\u0131, \u00f6rg\u00fctle irtibat ve iltisakl\u0131 olduklar\u0131 kabul edilmektedir. Ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7una ba\u011flanan a\u011f\u0131r cezai yapt\u0131r\u0131mlar g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde -\u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn nihai amac\u0131n\u0131n herkes\u00e7e bilindi\u011finin kabul edilebilece\u011fi kesin bir tarih vermek yoluna gidilmemi\u015f olmakla birlikte- \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn nihai amac\u0131n\u0131n herkes\u00e7e bilinir h\u00e2le geldi\u011fi olaylardan (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 11) \u00f6nce yasal zeminde faaliyet g\u00f6steren bir sivil toplum \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne ba\u011fl\u0131 oldu\u011fu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesi ile hareket ederek hataya d\u00fc\u015fenler ile FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin ama\u00e7 ve y\u00f6ntemlerini bilen \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131n\u0131n birbirlerinden dikkatli \u015fekilde ayr\u0131lmas\u0131 yoluna gidilmi\u015ftir (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 54)<\/p>\n
ii. Ba\u015fvurucunun Cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131nda Delil Olarak Kabul Edilen Faaliyetlerinin De\u011ferlendirilmesi<\/p>\n
33. Mahkemece, ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131nda FET\u00d6\/PDY iltisakl\u0131 olan okullarda idareci olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 delil olarak kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay, bu t\u00fcr eylemlerin \u00f6rg\u00fctsel alanda oldu\u011funun kabul edilmesi i\u00e7in \u00f6rg\u00fctsel \u00f6zellik ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesini beklemektedir (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 20). Ba\u015fvuruya konu olayda ise ilk derece mahkemesinin iltisakl\u0131 kurumda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma ya da bu kurumlarda idarecilik yapm\u0131\u015f olman\u0131n \u00f6rg\u00fctsel \u00f6zellik ta\u015f\u0131y\u0131p ta\u015f\u0131mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 konusunda bir de\u011ferlendirmede bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Nitekim Yarg\u0131tay, ki\u015filerin Sosyal G\u00fcvenlik Kurumu kay\u0131tlar\u0131na g\u00f6re \u00f6rg\u00fcte m\u00fczahir kurum veya kurulu\u015flarda \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131n\u0131n tek ba\u015f\u0131na \u00f6rg\u00fctsel bir faaliyet olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fini belirtmektedir [bir\u00e7ok karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. (kapat\u0131lan) Yarg\u0131tay 16. Ceza Dairesinin E.2019\/5505, K.2021\/1793, 2\/3\/2021; Yarg\u0131tay 3. Ceza Dairesinin E.2021\/14774, K.2022\/6617, 20\/10\/2022 say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131].<\/p>\n
34. \u0130lk derece mahkemesinin ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyetinde dikkate ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 di\u011fer bir delil de ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY’ye m\u00fczahir derne\u011fe \u00fcye olmas\u0131d\u0131r. Yarg\u0131tay FET\u00d6\/PDY’ye \u00fcyelik su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyetlere dair bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda yasal olarak kurulmu\u015f sendika veya derneklere \u00fcyelik delilini de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. Bu de\u011ferlendirmeye g\u00f6re FET\u00d6\/PDY’yle iltisakl\u0131 sendika, dernek ve di\u011fer yasal \u00f6rg\u00fctleri kurmalar\u0131, bunlara \u00fcye olmalar\u0131 veya y\u00f6netim ve denetim kurullar\u0131nda yer almalar\u0131 tek ba\u015f\u0131na ki\u015filerin \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn nihai amac\u0131n\u0131 bildi\u011fini, iltisak boyutunu a\u015farak \u00f6rg\u00fctle organik bir ba\u011f kurup hiyerar\u015fisine d\u00e2hil oldu\u011funu ispat etmeye yeterli \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetler kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilemez. Yarg\u0131taya g\u00f6re FET\u00d6\/PDY’ye m\u00fczahir oldu\u011fu tespit edilen derne\u011fe \u00fcye olmas\u0131 ancak ki\u015finin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc hiyerar\u015fisine d\u00e2hil olup s\u00fcreklilik, \u00e7e\u015fitlilik ve yo\u011funluk g\u00f6steren faaliyetleri tespit edildi\u011fi takdirde mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 i\u00e7in yeterli kabul edilebilir (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7\u00a7 17, 18, 57).<\/p>\n
35. Yarg\u0131tay\u0131n ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne m\u00fczahir sendika veya derneklere \u00fcyeli\u011fin delil olarak kullan\u0131larak bir kimsenin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc hiyerar\u015fisi i\u00e7inde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirdi\u011fi \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetlerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fart\u0131n\u0131 aramas\u0131 sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve \u00f6rg\u00fctlenme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn demokratik toplumdaki \u00f6nemi nedeniyledir (dernek hakk\u0131 ile \u00f6rg\u00fctlenme \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00f6nem ve kapsam\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak bkz. Hint Aseel Hayvanlar\u0131 Koruma ve Geli\u015ftirme Derne\u011fi ve Hikmet Ne\u011fu\u00e7, B. No: 2014\/4711, 22\/2\/2017, \u00a7\u00a7 41-44;sendikal \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fck kavram\u0131 ve sendika hakk\u0131n\u0131n kapsam\u0131na ili\u015fkin bkz. Yasemin Ek\u015fi, B. No: 2013\/5486, 4\/12\/2013, \u00a7 68; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 58). Eldeki dosyada ba\u015fvurucunun dernek \u00fcyesi olmas\u0131 cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131nda delil olarak kullan\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bununla beraber ki\u015filer kendi istedikleri \u015fekilde dernek kurmakta veya bir derne\u011fe \u00fcye olmakta \u00f6zg\u00fcrd\u00fcr. Anayasa’n\u0131n 53. maddesinde, herkesin \u00f6nceden izin almaks\u0131z\u0131n dernek kurma ve bunlara \u00fcye olma ya da \u00fcyelikten \u00e7\u0131kma h\u00fcrriyetine sahip oldu\u011fu gibi hi\u00e7 kimsenin bir derne\u011fe \u00fcye olmaya ve dernekte \u00fcye kalmaya zorlanamayaca\u011f\u0131 da ifade edilmi\u015ftir (Hint Aseel Hayvanlar\u0131 Koruma ve Geli\u015ftirme Derne\u011fi ve Hikmet Ne\u011fu\u00e7, B. No: 2014\/4711, 22\/2\/2017; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 58).<\/p>\n
36. Mahkeme, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7una ili\u015fkin mahk\u00fbmiyet gerek\u00e7esinde ba\u015fvurucunun ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n Zaman gazetesi aboneli\u011fine referans olmas\u0131n\u0131 da dikkate alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Anayasa Mahkemesi Metin Birdal karar\u0131nda, temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fckler kapsam\u0131nda kalan birtak\u0131m eylemlerin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda delil olarak de\u011ferlendirilmesini incelemi\u015ftir (Metin Birdal, \u00a7\u00a7 60-72). Anayasa Mahkemesine g\u00f6re yarg\u0131 mercilerince ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn hiyerar\u015fik yap\u0131s\u0131na d\u00e2hil oldu\u011funu g\u00f6steren deliller birlikte incelenmeli; temel haklar kapsam\u0131nda kalan her bir delil ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn amac\u0131, niteli\u011fi, bilinirli\u011fi, kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u015fiddetin t\u00fcr\u00fc ve yo\u011funlu\u011fu ile somut olay\u0131n ilgili di\u011fer \u015fartlar\u0131 dikkate al\u0131narak de\u011ferlendirilmelidir (Metin Birdal, \u00a7 72). Mahkemece de\u011ferlendirmeye al\u0131nan gazete aboneli\u011fi ya da bu aboneli\u011fe referans olma delili de bu ilkeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde incelenmelidir. Nitekim Yarg\u0131tay bir\u00e7ok karar\u0131nda Zaman gazetesi aboneli\u011finin ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7u y\u00f6n\u00fcnden delil ya da \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyet olarak kabul edilemeyece\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir (bkz. \u00a7 15). Buna kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k somut olayda Mahkemece sadece ba\u015fvurucunun Zaman gazetesi aboneli\u011fine referans olmas\u0131na de\u011finilmekle yetinilmi\u015f, s\u00f6z konusu delil hakk\u0131nda -Anayasa Mahkemesinin yukar\u0131da an\u0131lan kararlar\u0131nda belirtilen ilkeler \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde- herhangi bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131lmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
37. Ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda haz\u0131rlanan iddianamede \u00f6rg\u00fctsel nitelikteki toplant\u0131lara kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilmi\u015fse de di\u011fer ki\u015filer hakk\u0131nda y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturmalarda bir k\u0131s\u0131m san\u0131klar\u0131n ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 yurdu tarif ederek burada toplant\u0131 yapt\u0131klar\u0131na dair beyanlar\u0131 iddianamede anlat\u0131lmakla birlikte ba\u015fvurucunun bu toplant\u0131lara kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ya da organize etti\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde bir beyan bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca Mahkemece de bu iddia kararda dayanak olarak al\u0131nmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
38. Geriye ilk derece mahkemesinin ifade etti\u011fi \u015fekliyle “san\u0131\u011f\u0131n Bank Asya’da hesab\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011fu, bu hesab\u0131n\u0131 aktif bir \u015fekilde kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc ele ba\u015f\u0131 Fetullah G\u00fclen’in \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131s\u0131 \u00fczerine hesab\u0131na 11\/09\/2014 tarihinde 20.000 TL’lik kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131, 09\/11\/2014 tarihinde vadesinden \u00f6nce kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131n\u0131 kapatt\u0131\u011f\u0131, yine ayn\u0131 tarihte 20.118,64 TL tutar\u0131nda kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131n\u0131n tekrar aktif hale getirildi\u011fi ve hesab\u0131n\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k oldu\u011funun anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131” kalmaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
39. Anayasa Mahkemesi, Bank Asya verilerinin mahk\u00fbmiyette belirleyici delil olarak kabul edildi\u011fi bir yarg\u0131laman\u0131n \u015fik\u00e2yet konusu yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 ba\u015fvuruda ba\u015fvurucunun mutat hesap hareketlerine dayan\u0131larak ceza verildi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki savunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131nda mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131nda yeterli a\u00e7\u0131klamalara yer verilmemesini gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir (G\u00fcrcan Bal\u0131k, \u00a7 53).<\/p>\n
40. Bu ba\u011flamda Anayasa Mahkemesi G\u00fcrcan Bal\u0131k karar\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun Bank Asyadaki mevduat\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc iddias\u0131 karar sonucunu de\u011fi\u015ftirebilecek nitelikte esasl\u0131 bir iddia oldu\u011fu h\u00e2lde bunun gerek\u00e7ede kar\u015f\u0131lanmamas\u0131 nedeniyle gerek\u00e7eli karar hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi sonucuna ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (ayn\u0131 kararda bkz. \u00a7\u00a7 68-72). Anayasa Mahkemesi an\u0131lan karar\u0131nda \u00f6ncelikle ilgili Yarg\u0131tay i\u00e7tihad\u0131na at\u0131f yapmak suretiyle bahse konu Bankada parasal bir i\u015flem yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n kategorik olarak \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyet kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmedi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir. Nitekim Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131nda 22\/7\/2016 tarihinde faaliyet izni kald\u0131r\u0131l\u0131ncaya kadar faaliyetlerine devam eden ve FET\u00d6\/PDY ile iltisakl\u0131 olan Bank Asyada ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen mutat hesap hareketlerinin \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyet kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilemeyece\u011fi kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Ancak Yarg\u0131tay mutat i\u015flemlerin d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan, \u00f6rg\u00fct liderinin talimat\u0131 \u00fczerine \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn amac\u0131na hizmet eden ve Bankan\u0131n yarar\u0131na yap\u0131lan \u00f6deme ve sair i\u015flemleri su\u00e7 delili olarak kabul etmektedir (G\u00fcrcan Bal\u0131k, \u00a7\u00a7 39-47). Bununla birlikte ki\u015finin \u00f6rg\u00fct liderinin talimat\u0131 ile i\u015flem yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n ku\u015fkuya yer b\u0131rakmayacak bi\u00e7imde tespiti bak\u0131m\u0131ndan Bank Asya nezdinde 2014 y\u0131l\u0131 \u00f6ncesi de d\u00e2hil olmak \u00fczere hesap a\u00e7\u0131l\u0131\u015f bilgileri, ayl\u0131k bakiye geli\u015fimi ve t\u00fcm hesap hareketlerine ili\u015fkin kay\u0131tlar\u0131n dosyaya celbedilip incelenmesi, temin edilen kay\u0131tlar \u00fczerinde uzman bilirki\u015fi raporu al\u0131n\u0131p \u00f6rg\u00fct liderinin talimat\u0131ndan sonra ve bu talimat do\u011frultusunda kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131 a\u00e7ma, d\u00f6viz veya alt\u0131n alma, para yat\u0131rma vb. i\u015flemlerinin bulunup bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n tespit edilmesi gerekmektedir (Yarg\u0131tay kararlar\u0131 i\u00e7in bkz. Serkan G\u00f6lge, \u00a7\u00a7 30-39; Raziye Ak\u00e7ay, \u00a7\u00a7 24, 27; Hakan Dar\u0131c\u0131 ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2021\/34045, 20\/7\/2023, \u00a7\u00a7 13-21).<\/p>\n
41. Somut olayda Mahkemece bankac\u0131l\u0131k verileri \u00fczerinde bilirki\u015fi incelemesi yapt\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Gerek\u00e7eli karar i\u00e7eri\u011fine ve dosyadaki delillere g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun maa\u015f \u00f6demeleri ve di\u011fer bankac\u0131l\u0131k faaliyetlerinde ilgili bankay\u0131 kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u00e7a\u011fr\u0131 d\u00f6nemi i\u00e7inde 11\/9\/2014 tarihinde a\u00e7t\u0131\u011f\u0131 20.000 TL.lik kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131n\u0131 vadesi dolmadan \u00f6nce 9\/11\/2014 tarihinde kapatt\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve yine ayn\u0131 tarihte 20.118,64 TL.lik yeni kat\u0131l\u0131m hesab\u0131 a\u00e7t\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilerek \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7unu i\u015fledi\u011fi sonucuna var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvurucu, yarg\u0131lama s\u0131ras\u0131nda yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 savunmada Bank Asyada hesap a\u00e7t\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u00e7e\u015fitli \u015firketlere ba\u011fl\u0131 yurt ve okullarda idareci olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, bu d\u00f6nemlerde maa\u015flar\u0131n\u0131 belirtilen bankadan ald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve bankac\u0131l\u0131k i\u015flemlerini orada y\u00fcr\u00fctt\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc, faizsiz finans kurulu\u015fu olmas\u0131 sebebiyle de bu Bankay\u0131 tercih etti\u011fini, \u00f6rg\u00fct liderinin talimat\u0131yla bu Bankaya para yat\u0131rmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, d\u00fczenli olarak bankac\u0131l\u0131k faaliyetlerinde kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucunun bu savunmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda s\u00f6z konusu hesap a\u00e7ma ve bankac\u0131l\u0131k i\u015flemlerini ekonomik \u00e7\u0131karlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda farkl\u0131 bir amac\u0131 ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirme saiki ile yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 hususunda gerek\u00e7eli kararda yeterli bir de\u011ferlendirme yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 s\u00f6ylemek m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6z\u00fckmemektedir. Kald\u0131 ki Yarg\u0131tay mutat bankac\u0131l\u0131k i\u015flemleri d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda kalan, \u00f6rg\u00fct liderinin talimat\u0131 \u00fczerine \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn amac\u0131na hizmet eden ve Bankan\u0131n yarar\u0131na yap\u0131lan \u00f6deme ve sair i\u015flemleri su\u00e7 delili olarak kabul etmekle beraber bu t\u00fcr bir eylemi 26\/9\/2004 tarihli ve 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Ceza Kanunu’nun 220. maddesinin (7) numaral\u0131 f\u0131kras\u0131 \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde \u00f6rg\u00fcte yard\u0131m etme su\u00e7u kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirmektedir (G\u00fcrcan Bal\u0131k, \u00a7 43).<\/p>\n
42. Ba\u015fvurucunun mahk\u00fbmiyetinde esas al\u0131nan deliller g\u00f6zetildi\u011finde Mahkemenin tek ba\u015f\u0131na \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn nihai amac\u0131n\u0131 bildi\u011fini ve ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc hiyerar\u015fisi i\u00e7erisinde ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmi\u015f \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetlerin varl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ortaya koydu\u011fu s\u00f6ylenemez (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 59).<\/p>\n
iii. Ba\u015fvurunun Su\u00e7ta ve Cezada Kanunilik \u0130lkesi Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden De\u011ferlendirilmesi<\/p>\n
43. Su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesi hukuk devletinin kurucu unsurlar\u0131ndand\u0131r. Kanunilik ilkesinin genel olarak b\u00fct\u00fcn hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin d\u00fczenlenmesinde temel bir g\u00fcvence olu\u015fturman\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n belirlenmesi bak\u0131m\u0131ndan \u00f6zel bir anlam\u0131 ve \u00f6nemi olup bu kapsamda ki\u015filerin kanunen yasaklanmam\u0131\u015f veya yapt\u0131r\u0131ma ba\u011flanmam\u0131\u015f fiillerden dolay\u0131 keyf\u00ee bir \u015fekilde su\u00e7lanmalar\u0131 ve cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131 \u00f6nlenmekte; buna ek olarak su\u00e7lanan ki\u015finin lehine olan d\u00fczenlemelerin geriye etkili bir \u015fekilde uygulanmas\u0131 sa\u011flanmaktad\u0131r (Karlis A.\u015e., B. No: 2013\/849, 15\/4\/2014, \u00a7 32; Adnan \u015een [GK], B. No: 2018\/8903, 15\/4\/2021, \u00a7 104; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 60).<\/p>\n
44. Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 38. maddesine ko\u015fut olarak 5237 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 2. maddesinde de d\u00fczenlenen ilke, yasaklanan eylemlerin ve bu yasak eylemlere verilecek cezalar\u0131n hi\u00e7bir ku\u015fkuya yer b\u0131rakmayacak bi\u00e7imde kanunda g\u00f6sterilmesini, kural\u0131n a\u00e7\u0131k, anla\u015f\u0131l\u0131r ve s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131n belli olmas\u0131n\u0131 gerektirmektedir. Ki\u015filerin yasak eylemleri \u00f6nceden bilmeleri d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcncesine dayanan bu ilkeyle temel hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklerin g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nmas\u0131 ama\u00e7lanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r (Fikriye Aytin ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2013\/6154, 11\/12\/2014, \u00a7 51; AYM, E.2010\/69, K.2011\/116, 7\/7\/2011; AYM, E.2019\/9, K.2019\/27, 11\/4\/2019, \u00a7 13; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 61).<\/p>\n
45. Ceza verme yetkisinin keyf\u00ee ve hukuk d\u0131\u015f\u0131 ama\u00e7larla kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6nlenebilmesi kanunilik ilkesinin kat\u0131 bir \u015fekilde uygulanmas\u0131yla m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olabilir. Bu kapsamda yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131nca yap\u0131lacak yorumun ceza normlar\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6z\u00fcyle \u00e7eli\u015fmemesi ve \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir olmas\u0131 gerekir. Yarg\u0131 organlar\u0131, ter\u00f6r su\u00e7lar\u0131 da d\u00e2hil olmak \u00fczere t\u00fcm su\u00e7lar bak\u0131m\u0131ndan su\u00e7a veya cezaya ili\u015fkin olgular\u0131 de\u011ferlendirirken, \u00f6zellikle fiillerin bir su\u00e7a kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131k gelip gelmedi\u011fini belirlerken su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesini anlams\u0131z k\u0131lacak \u015fekilde \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclemez bir yakla\u015f\u0131mda bulunmamal\u0131d\u0131r (Mehmet Emin Karamehmet ve di\u011ferleri, B. No: 2017\/4902, 28\/1\/2020, \u00a7 47; Adnan \u015een, \u00a7 107; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 62). Bu kapsamda somut olayda de\u011ferlendirilmesi gereken, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7unun kapsam\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclemez \u015fekilde san\u0131\u011f\u0131n aleyhine olarak geni\u015fletici bir yoruma tabi tutulup tutulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131d\u0131r (Ahmet Aslan, B. No: 2021\/23949, 6\/10\/2022, \u00a7 68; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 62). Bu nedenle su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin denetlenmesinde normun mevcut deliller \u00e7er\u00e7evesinde somut olaya uygulan\u0131\u015f bi\u00e7iminin yasal d\u00fczenlemeyle ba\u011fda\u015fmaz ve \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclemez bir sonuca yol a\u00e7\u0131p a\u00e7mad\u0131\u011f\u0131 incelenmelidir (Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 62).<\/p>\n
46. Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere yarg\u0131 makamlar\u0131 ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin nihai amac\u0131n\u0131 ve y\u00f6ntemlerini bilen \u00f6rg\u00fct mensuplar\u0131ndan biri oldu\u011funu ileri s\u00fcrmedi\u011fi gibi FET\u00d6\/PDY’nin devlet\u00e7e bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc kabul edilmeye ve herkes\u00e7e \u00f6yle bilinmeye ba\u015flanmas\u0131ndan \u00f6nce s\u00f6z konusu olu\u015fumun bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc oldu\u011fundan haberdar oldu\u011funu da iddia etmemi\u015ftir. \u00dcyesi olduklar\u0131ndan bahisle ki\u015filerin cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmalar\u0131na neden olan bir olu\u015fumun veya yap\u0131lanman\u0131n ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc oldu\u011funu bildiklerinin ortaya konulmamas\u0131 ceza hukukunun genel ilkelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu gibi \u00f6nceden su\u00e7 olarak tan\u0131mlanmayan fiilleri i\u015fledikleri gerek\u00e7esiyle ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma gibi a\u011f\u0131r su\u00e7lardan mahk\u00fbm edilmeleri sonucunu da do\u011furabilir (Ahmet Aslan, \u00a7 70; Bilal Celalettin \u015ea\u015fmaz, \u00a7 63).<\/p>\n
47. Somut olayda ilk derece mahkemesi ba\u015fvurucunun Bank Asya hesap hareketleri, FET\u00d6\/PDY ile iltisakl\u0131 olan okul ve yurtlarda idareci olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131, yine iltisakl\u0131 dernek \u00fcyeli\u011finin bulunmas\u0131 ve Zaman gazetesi aboneli\u011fine ili\u015fkin referans kay\u0131tlar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik tespitler bir b\u00fct\u00fcn olarak ele al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ba\u015fvurucunun bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma bilinciyle hareket etti\u011fini ortaya koymakta ba\u015far\u0131l\u0131 olamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fka bir ifadeyle ilk derece mahkemesi, ba\u015fvurucunun mahkumiyetine esas ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 fiillerin su\u00e7 olu\u015fturan ya da \u00f6rg\u00fctsel faaliyetler ba\u011flam\u0131nda ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen fiiller oldu\u011funu, bu fiilleri i\u015fledi\u011fi s\u0131rada ba\u015fvurucunun s\u00f6z konusu yap\u0131n\u0131n bir ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc niteli\u011finden haberdar oldu\u011funun kabul edilmesi gerekti\u011fini ilgili ve yeterli gerek\u00e7elerle ortaya koyamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
48. B\u00f6ylelikle ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fc \u00fcyeli\u011fi su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyetinde delil olarak kullan\u0131lan fiillerinin kendisini cezai y\u00f6nden sorumluluk alt\u0131na sokaca\u011f\u0131n\u0131 makul olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc g\u00f6sterilememi\u015ftir. Sonu\u00e7 olarak ba\u015fvurucunun bu \u015fekilde ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbm edilmesi, an\u0131lan su\u00e7un ba\u015fvurucunun aleyhine \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclemez bi\u00e7imde geni\u015fletici bir yoruma tabi tutulmas\u0131 ile m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmu\u015ftur. Ortaya \u00e7\u0131kan bu sonu\u00e7 Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 38. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 ile ba\u011fda\u015fmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
49. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurucunun ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan mahk\u00fbmiyeti nedeniyle Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 38. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
50. Ba\u015fvurucu ayr\u0131ca hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 delillerle, tarafs\u0131z, ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z ve kanuni h\u00e2kimlik ilkelerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 ve gerek\u00e7esiz karar verildi\u011fini, m\u00fcdafii yard\u0131m\u0131ndan faydalanma ve savunma hakk\u0131n\u0131n k\u0131s\u0131tland\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, masumiyet karinesi ile non bis in idem ilkelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fini belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda bir k\u0131s\u0131m haklar\u0131n\u0131n da ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Ba\u015fvurucunun, su\u00e7 ve cezalar\u0131n kanunili\u011fi ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine karar verildi\u011finden kararda var\u0131lan sonuca ve uygun g\u00f6r\u00fclen giderime g\u00f6re ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc di\u011fer \u015fik\u00e2yetleri hakk\u0131nda kabul edilebilirlik ve esas y\u00f6n\u00fcnden ayr\u0131ca bir inceleme yap\u0131lmas\u0131na ihlalin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131 itibar\u0131yla bu a\u015famada gerek olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Di\u011fer \u0130hlal \u0130ddialar\u0131<\/p>\n
51. Tutuklama tedbirinin hukuki olmamas\u0131 tutuklulu\u011fun makul s\u00fcreyi a\u015fmas\u0131 nedenleriyle ki\u015fi \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve g\u00fcvenli\u011fi hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddias\u0131n\u0131n F\u0131rat \u0130\u015fg\u00f6ren (B. No: 2014\/6425, 17\/11\/2016, \u00a7 34) karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle;g\u00f6zalt\u0131 s\u00fcreci ile ceza ve infaz kurumundaki uygulamalar nedeniyle k\u00f6t\u00fc muamele yasa\u011f\u0131n\u0131n, e\u011fitim hakk\u0131n\u0131n, \u00f6zel ve aile hayat\u0131na sayg\u0131 hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131n\u0131n bireysel ba\u015fvuru yolunun ikincil niteli\u011fi gere\u011fi \u0130smail Bu\u011fra \u0130\u015flek (B. No: 2013\/1177, 26\/3\/2013, \u00a7 17) ve \u00d6mer Akta\u015f, (B. No: 2014\/14915, 21\/9\/2016, \u00a7\u00a7 38-39) kararlar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle; e\u015fitlik ilkesinin, ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn, toplanma ve \u00f6rg\u00fctlenme h\u00fcrriyetlerinin ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkin a\u00e7\u0131klamalarda bulunma y\u00f6n\u00fcndeki y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn yerine getirilmedi\u011fi ve dolay\u0131s\u0131yla bu iddialar temellendirilemedi\u011finden Cemal G\u00fcnsel ([GK], B. No: 2016\/12900, 21\/1\/2021) karar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun olmas\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VI. G\u0130DER\u0130M<\/p>\n
52. Ba\u015fvurucu; ihlalin tespiti, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n yenilenmesi ve 1.000.000 TL manevi tazminat talebinde bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
53. 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
54. Ayr\u0131ca ihlalin ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n yeterli giderim sa\u011flayaca\u011f\u0131 anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan ba\u015fvurucunun manevi tazminat talebinin de reddine karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
VII. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle;<\/p>\n
A. 1. Su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n KABUL ED\u0130LEB\u0130L\u0130R OLDU\u011eUNA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
2. Di\u011fer ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kabul edilebilirlik kriterlerini kar\u015f\u0131lamamas\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
B. Anayasa’n\u0131n 38. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin \u0130HLAL ED\u0130LD\u0130\u011e\u0130NE Basri BA\u011eCI ‘n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131oyu ve OY\u00c7OKLU\u011eUYLA,<\/p>\n
C. Adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n di\u011fer bir k\u0131s\u0131m g\u00fcvencelerinin ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddialar y\u00f6n\u00fcnden \u0130NCELEME YAPILMASINA GEREK OLMADI\u011eINA OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE,<\/p>\n
D. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ihlalinin sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ortadan kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 i\u00e7in yeniden yarg\u0131lama yap\u0131lmak \u00fczere Malatya 1. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesine (E.2017\/515, K.2017\/295 say\u0131l\u0131 karar) G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
E. Ba\u015fvurucunun tazminat taleplerinin REDD\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
F. 364,60 TL ba\u015fvuru harc\u0131ndan olu\u015fan yarg\u0131lama giderinin ba\u015fvurucuya \u00d6DENMES\u0130NE,<\/p>\n
G. \u00d6demenin karar\u0131n tebli\u011fini takiben ba\u015fvurucunun Hazine ve Maliye Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na ba\u015fvuru tarihinden itibaren d\u00f6rt ay i\u00e7inde yap\u0131lmas\u0131na, \u00f6demede gecikme olmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde bu s\u00fcrenin sona erdi\u011fi tarihten \u00f6deme tarihine kadar ge\u00e7en s\u00fcre i\u00e7in yasal FA\u0130Z UYGULANMASINA,<\/p>\n
H. Karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE 27\/11\/2024 tarihinde karar verildi.<\/p>\n
KAR\u015eIOY<\/p>\n
1. 1981 do\u011fumlu olan Ba\u015fvurucu e\u011fitimini tamlad\u0131ktan sonra FET\u00d6 yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 i\u00e7erisinde bulunan \u00e7e\u015fitli kurumlarda tayine tabi \u00e7al\u0131\u015fan olarak ve y\u00f6netici d\u00fczeyinde g\u00f6revler alm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu g\u00f6revlerine ili\u015fkin en son 13.06.2016 tarihine kadar SGK kayd\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
2. 2014 ba\u015f\u0131 ve sonras\u0131na ili\u015fkin d\u00f6nemde Bank Asya\u2019da yeni hesap a\u00e7t\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve buradaki mebla\u011flar\u0131 art\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit edilmi\u015f, ayr\u0131ca bu konuyla ilgili bilirki\u015fi incelemesi de yapt\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Di\u011fer taraftan Zaman Gazetesine yeni abonelikler kazand\u0131rmaya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131na ili\u015fkin faaliyetleri belirlenmi\u015f, \u00f6rg\u00fcte m\u00fczahir dernekte \u00fcyelik kayd\u0131n\u0131n oldu\u011fu saptanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fcn bas\u0131n ve yay\u0131n organlar\u0131n\u0131n kapat\u0131lmas\u0131na ili\u015ftin s\u00fcre\u00e7te Malatya Adliyesi \u00f6n\u00fcnde yap\u0131lan protesto g\u00f6sterisine kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 tespit olunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
5. Bunlar\u0131n yan\u0131 s\u0131ra \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 kurumlarda toplant\u0131lar yap\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 bilgisine de yer verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. T\u00fcm bu veriler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda yarg\u0131lama mercileri taraf\u0131ndan Ba\u015fvurucuya atfedilen eylem ve durumlar\u0131n \u00e7e\u015fitlilik, s\u00fcreklilik ve yo\u011funluk de\u011ferlendirilmesi yap\u0131larak \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyeli\u011finden mahkumiyetine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Konu yarg\u0131lama makamlar\u0131n\u0131n delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi yetkisi kapsam\u0131nda olup, mahk\u00fbmiyet karar\u0131 verilmesinde a\u00e7\u0131k bir keyfilik veya bariz takdir hatas\u0131ndan s\u00f6z edilmesi de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn g\u00f6z\u00fckmemektedir.<\/p>\n
8. Bu bilgiler \u0131\u015f\u0131\u011f\u0131nda su\u00e7 ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ihlal edilmedi\u011fi kanaatinde oldu\u011fumuzdan aksi y\u00f6ndeki \u00e7o\u011funluk g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne i\u015ftirak edilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fkan<\/p>\n
\u00a0Basri BA\u011eCI<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 27\/11\/2024 tarihli ve 2019\/5316 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 \u015e. T. BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2019\/5316) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 27\/11\/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 : Murat BA\u015ePINAR Ba\u015fvurucu : \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN KONUSU 1. Ba\u015fvuru, ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan verilen mahk\u00fbmiyet h\u00fckm\u00fc nedeniyle su\u00e7ta ve cezada kanunilik ilkesinin ve di\u011fer anayasal haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. II. BA\u015eVURU S\u00dcREC\u0130 2. Ba\u015fvuru 12\/2\/2019tarihinde yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 3. Komisyon, ba\u015fvurunun kabul edilebilirlik ve esas incelemesinin B\u00f6l\u00fcm taraf\u0131ndan yap\u0131lmas\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. 4. Ba\u015fvuru belgelerinin bir \u00f6rne\u011fi bilgi i\u00e7in Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131na (Bakanl\u0131k) g\u00f6nderilmi\u015ftir. Bakanl\u0131k g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fc bildirmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucu, Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcne kar\u015f\u0131 beyanda bulunmam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. III. OLAY VE OLGULAR 5. Ba\u015fvuru formu ve eklerinde ifade edildi\u011fi \u015fekliyle ilgili olaylar \u00f6zetle \u015f\u00f6yledir: 6. 1981 do\u011fumlu olan ba\u015fvurucu hakk\u0131nda Fetullah\u00e7\u0131 Ter\u00f6r \u00d6rg\u00fct\u00fc\/Paralel Devlet Yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 (FET\u00d6\/PDY) \u00fcyesi oldu\u011fu \u015f\u00fcphesiyle Malatya Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nca (Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k) soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lm\u0131\u015f ve Malatya 1. Sulh Ceza H\u00e2kimli\u011finin 9\/12\/2016 tarihli karar\u0131yla tutuklama tedbiri uygulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. 7. Soru\u015fturma neticesinde Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k, ba\u015fvurucunun silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcne \u00fcye olma su\u00e7undan cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 talebiyle 12\/4\/2017 tarihli iddianame d\u00fczenlemi\u015ftir. \u0130ddianamede ba\u015fvurucunun FET\u00d6\/PDY yap\u0131lanmas\u0131 i\u00e7inde yer alan \u015fah\u0131slarla \u00f6rg\u00fctsel nitelikte toplant\u0131lara kat\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, hakk\u0131nda …<\/p>","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[27],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30456","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n