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
AL\u0130 DO\u011eAN VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU<\/p>\n
(Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/9098)<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
Karar Tarihi: 30\/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
Hasan SARA\u00c7<\/p>\n
Ba\u015fvurucular<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
1. Ali DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
2. Aynur TA\u015eKIRAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
3. Ay\u015fe DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
4. Elif DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
5. Fatma ERCAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
6. G\u00fcvercin ESER<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
7. Aziz DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
8. Ay\u015fe ANU\u015e<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
9. Cennet DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
10. \u0130mren DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
11. Mehmet DO\u011eAN<\/p>\n
Vekili<\/p>\n
:<\/p>\n
Av. U\u011fur ER\u0130K<\/p>\n
\u00a0<\/p>\n
I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130<\/p>\n
1. Ba\u015fvuru; 1993 y\u0131l\u0131nda meydana gelen silahl\u0131 sald\u0131r\u0131 sonucundaki \u00f6l\u00fcme ili\u015fkin etkili soru\u015fturma yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle ya\u015fam hakk\u0131n\u0131n, 17\/7\/2004 tarihli ve 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Ter\u00f6r ve Ter\u00f6rle M\u00fccadeleden Do\u011fan Zararlar\u0131n Kar\u015f\u0131lanmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun kapsam\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n reddedilmesi nedeniyle hakkaniyete uygun yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle de makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir.<\/p>\n
2. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n murisi M.D., Pazarc\u0131k-Kahramanmara\u015f’ta bulunan Karaa\u011fa\u00e7 k\u00f6y\u00fcndeki evlerinde 1993 y\u0131l\u0131nda gece ge\u00e7 saatlerde kimli\u011fi belirsiz ki\u015fi veya ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen silahl\u0131 sald\u0131r\u0131 sonucunda \u00f6lm\u00fc\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu Ay\u015fe Do\u011fan ise yaralanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
3. Olayla ilgili olarak Pazarc\u0131k Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 (Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131) taraf\u0131ndan ba\u015flat\u0131lan soru\u015fturmada faili me\u00e7hul \u015fah\u0131slar hakk\u0131nda daim\u00ee arama karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir. Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nca 15\/6\/2010 tarihinde faillerin yakalanamamas\u0131 ve zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 m\u00fcddetinin dolmas\u0131 nedeniyle kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verilmi\u015ftir. Bu karara kar\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan itiraz \u00fczerine zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 m\u00fcddetinin 20 y\u0131l oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015fsa da 27\/11\/2013 tarihinde yine ayn\u0131 gerek\u00e7e ile kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verilmi\u015f oldu\u011fu tespit edilmi\u015ftir. Bu karara itiraz edilip edilmedi\u011fi ise ba\u015fvuru formu ile ekinde yer alan belgelerden anla\u015f\u0131lamam\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
4. Ba\u015fvurucular, murislerinin ter\u00f6r eylemi sonucunda \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ileri s\u00fcrerek 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun uyar\u0131nca destekten yoksun kalma tazminat\u0131 \u00f6denmesi istemiyle 12\/6\/2006 tarihinde Kahramanmara\u015f Valili\u011fi Zarar Tespit Komisyonuna (Komisyon) m\u00fcracaatta bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
5. Komisyon, M.D.nin yasa d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyelerince ve \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn ama\u00e7lar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda ya da ge\u00e7ici k\u00f6y korucusu ve \u00f6zel harekat timleri taraf\u0131ndan \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ortaya koyan ba\u015fvuru sahiplerinin varsay\u0131mlar\u0131 d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda herhangi bir bilgi ve belge bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 gerek\u00e7e g\u00f6stererek taleplerin reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
6. Ba\u015fvurucular 6\/2\/2009 tarihinde Gaziantep 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesinde (Mahkeme) i\u015flemin iptali i\u00e7in dava a\u00e7m\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Mahkeme, Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 dosyas\u0131ndaki bulgulara i\u015faretle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n murisinin yasa d\u0131\u015f\u0131 \u00f6rg\u00fct \u00fcyesi taraf\u0131ndan ve \u00f6rg\u00fct ama\u00e7lar\u0131 do\u011frultusunda \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ya da olay\u0131n ge\u00e7ici k\u00f6y korucusu veya \u00f6zel harekat timlerince ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin kesin bir delil bulunmamas\u0131, Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 dosyas\u0131n\u0131n h\u00e2len soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131nda olmas\u0131 ve olay\u0131n hangi ama\u00e7la ve kim taraf\u0131ndan ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirildi\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnde kesin bir delil elde edilememi\u015f olmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanundan yararland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan, tesis olunan dava konusu i\u015flemde hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle davan\u0131n reddine karar vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
7. Karar\u0131n temyiz edilmesi \u00fczerine Dan\u0131\u015ftay Onbe\u015finci Dairesi (Daire) 2011 y\u0131l\u0131nda karar\u0131n bozulmas\u0131na h\u00fckmetmi\u015ftir. Daire; davac\u0131lar murisinin ki\u015fisel husumet nedeniyle \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne ili\u015fkin herhangi bir bilgi ve belgenin bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, davac\u0131lar murisinin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne ve e\u015finin yaralanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin olay\u0131n, olay tarihinde y\u00f6rede meydana gelen ter\u00f6r olaylar\u0131n\u0131n bir sonucu oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan u\u011fran\u0131lan \u00f6zel ve ola\u011fand\u0131\u015f\u0131 zarar\u0131n 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda tazmin edilmesi hakkaniyet gere\u011fi olup ba\u015fvurunun reddine ili\u015fkin dava konusu i\u015flemde hukuka uyarl\u0131k, davan\u0131n reddi yolunda verilen Mahkeme karar\u0131nda hukuki isabet bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
8. Bozma karar\u0131 \u00fczerine dosyan\u0131n devredildi\u011fi Kahramanmara\u015f \u0130dare Mahkemesi (\u0130dare Mahkemesi) Gaziantep 2. \u0130dare Mahkemesinin karar\u0131nda \u0131srar ve ret karar\u0131 vermi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
9. Israr karar\u0131 \u00fczerine Dan\u0131\u015ftay \u0130dari Dava Daireleri Kurulu, \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n hukuka uygun oldu\u011funu kabul ederek temyiz taleplerinin reddine 5\/11\/2018 tarihinde karar vermi\u015ftir. Karar d\u00fczeltme istemleri de 11\/12\/2019 tarihinde reddedilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
10. Ba\u015fvurucular, nihai h\u00fckm\u00fc 9\/2\/2020 tarihinde \u00f6\u011frendikten sonra 3\/3\/2020 tarihinde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n
II. DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RME<\/p>\n
A. Ya\u015fam Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fi \u0130ddias\u0131 Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden <\/p>\n
11. Ba\u015fvurucular; \u00f6l\u00fcme ili\u015fkin maddi ko\u015fullar\u0131n ayd\u0131nlat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, \u015f\u00fcphelerin yarg\u0131sal mercilerce giderilmedi\u011fini, ceza soru\u015fturmas\u0131nda olay\u0131n g\u00fcvenlik g\u00fc\u00e7lerince ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 ihtimaline ra\u011fmen etkili soru\u015fturma y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmedi\u011fini beyan ederek ya\u015fam hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve etkili ba\u015fvuru hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011finden yak\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
12. Ba\u015fvuru, ya\u015fam hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda incelenmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
13. Devletin ya\u015fam hakk\u0131 kapsam\u0131ndaki pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerinin usule ili\u015fkin y\u00f6n\u00fc, do\u011fal olmayan her \u00f6l\u00fcm olay\u0131n\u0131n sorumlular\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesini ve gerekiyorsa cezaland\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 sa\u011flayabilecek etkili bir soru\u015fturma y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesini gerektirir (Fatma Ak\u0131n ve Mehmet Eren [GK], B. No: 2017\/26636, 10\/11\/2021, \u00a7 97).<\/p>\n
14. Kas\u0131tl\u0131 \u00f6ld\u00fcrme olaylar\u0131 hakk\u0131nda y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmesi gereken soru\u015fturma \u015f\u00fcphesiz ceza soru\u015fturmas\u0131d\u0131r (Asya G\u00f6res ve di\u011ferleri [GK], B. No: 2018\/15851, 1\/12\/2022, \u00a7 74).<\/p>\n
15. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n yetkili makamlara m\u00fcracaat etmelerine ra\u011fmen do\u011fal olmayan bir \u00f6l\u00fcmle ilgili soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lmam\u0131\u015fsa veya ba\u015flat\u0131lan soru\u015fturmada ilerleme yoksa ya da soru\u015fturma art\u0131k etkisiz bir h\u00e2l alm\u0131\u015fsa ba\u015fvuruculardan soru\u015fturman\u0131n sonucunu beklemelerini istemek makul olmayacakt\u0131r. B\u00f6yle bir durumda ba\u015fvurucular, gerekli \u00f6zeni g\u00f6stermeli ve soru\u015fturma ba\u015flat\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n yahut etkili bir soru\u015fturma y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmedi\u011finin fark\u0131na vard\u0131klar\u0131 veya varmalar\u0131 gerekti\u011fi andan itibaren otuz g\u00fcn i\u00e7inde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmal\u0131d\u0131rlar. Zira soru\u015fturman\u0131n etkilili\u011fini sa\u011flayacak bir ba\u015fvuru yolu bulunmamaktad\u0131r. Do\u011fal olarak ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n etkili bir soru\u015fturma y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclmedi\u011finin ne zaman fark\u0131na varmalar\u0131 gerekti\u011fi her davan\u0131n \u015fartlar\u0131na ba\u011fl\u0131 olarak de\u011ferlendirilecektir (Adle Azizo\u011flu ve Sadat Azizo\u011flu [1.B.], B. No: 2014\/15732, 24\/1\/2018, \u00a7 87).<\/p>\n
16. Soru\u015fturmada ilerleme sa\u011flanaca\u011f\u0131na dair umut verici geli\u015fmeler ve ger\u00e7ek\u00e7i varsay\u0131mlar bulundu\u011fu ve soru\u015fturman\u0131n ilerlemesini sa\u011flay\u0131c\u0131 tedbirler al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00fcrece ba\u015fvuruculardan ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131 t\u00fcketmeden bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmalar\u0131 da beklenmemelidir. Ancak bu h\u00e2lde dahi soru\u015fturman\u0131n daha sonra etkisizle\u015fti\u011fini \u00f6\u011frenen ba\u015fvurucular, durumun fark\u0131na vard\u0131klar\u0131 veya varmalar\u0131 gerekti\u011fi andan itibaren s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde bireysel ba\u015fvuruda bulunmal\u0131d\u0131rlar (Adle Azizo\u011flu ve Sadat Azizo\u011flu,\u00a7 88).<\/p>\n
17. Ba\u015fvuruya konu somut olayda ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n yak\u0131n\u0131n\u0131n \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fclmesi nedeniyle y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen soru\u015fturmada daimi arama karar\u0131 verilmi\u015ftir. 15\/6\/2010 tarihinde ise dava zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin doldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar verilmi\u015ftir. Kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karara yap\u0131lan itiraz, dava zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin 20 y\u0131l oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle kabul edilmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131k 27\/11\/2013 tarihinde de -dava zamana\u015f\u0131m\u0131 s\u00fcresinin doldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle- kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na karar vermi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla soru\u015fturma asl\u0131nda daimi arama karar\u0131 verilmesiyle etkisiz bir h\u00e2le gelmi\u015ftir. Buna ra\u011fmen ba\u015fvurucular, \u00f6l\u00fcm olay\u0131 hakk\u0131nda kovu\u015fturmaya yer olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131na dair karar da verilmesine kar\u015f\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yapmak i\u00e7in 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 kanun kapsam\u0131nda yapt\u0131klar\u0131 ba\u015fvuruyla ilgili yarg\u0131sal s\u00fcrecin nihayete ermesini beklemi\u015ftir. Oysa 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun ve bu ba\u015fvurunun reddi \u00fczerine y\u00fcr\u00fct\u00fclen yarg\u0131sal s\u00fcrecin ba\u015fvuru s\u00fcresine bir etkisi bulunmamaktad\u0131r (S\u00f6z\u00fc edilen tazminat yolunun devletin ya\u015fam\u0131 koruma y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc y\u00f6n\u00fcnden deetkili bir yol olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n de\u011ferlendirildi\u011fi \u00f6rnek karar i\u00e7in bkz. Aziz Biter ve di\u011ferleri [1.B.], B. No: 2015\/4603, 19\/2\/2019, \u00a7\u00a756-78).Bu nedenle ya\u015fam hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131, soru\u015fturman\u0131n etkisizli\u011finin fark edilmesi gereken tarihten itibaren s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde dile getirilmemi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
18. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
B. Hakkaniyete Uygun Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fi \u0130ddias\u0131<\/p>\n
19. Ba\u015fvurucular; murislerinin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcyle sonu\u00e7land\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilen olay\u0131n geli\u015fimi, olu\u015f \u015fekli ve niteli\u011fi dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda olay\u0131n o tarihlerde y\u00f6rede ya\u015fanan yayg\u0131n ve yo\u011fun ter\u00f6r olaylar\u0131n\u0131n bir sonucu oldu\u011funu ve 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda kald\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 buna ra\u011fmen davan\u0131n hukuka ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak reddedildi\u011fini belirtmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
20. 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun uyar\u0131nca yap\u0131lan taleplerin belirtilen Kanun kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilip de\u011ferlendirilmeyece\u011fi hususu, Kanun\u2019un kapsam\u0131n\u0131n belirlenmesine ili\u015fkin mevzuat h\u00fck\u00fcmlerinin yorumu ve somut olay\u0131n bu \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fct uyar\u0131nca de\u011ferlendirilmesi konusundaki takdir yetkisi yarg\u0131 mercilerine aittir (Ali \u015ea\u015fk\u0131n ve di\u011ferleri [2.B], B. No: 2013\/6819, 21\/4\/2016, \u00a7 38).<\/p>\n
21. Anayasa’n\u0131n 148. maddesinin d\u00f6rd\u00fcnc\u00fc f\u0131kras\u0131nda kanun yolunda g\u00f6zetilmesi gereken hususlara ili\u015fkin \u015fik\u00e2yetlerin bireysel ba\u015fvuruda incelenemeyece\u011fi belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu kapsamda ilke olarak mahkemeler \u00f6n\u00fcnde dava konusu yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f maddi olay ve olgular\u0131n kan\u0131tlanmas\u0131, delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesi, hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131n yorumlanmas\u0131 ve uygulanmas\u0131 ile uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kla ilgili var\u0131lan sonucun adil olup olmamas\u0131 bireysel ba\u015fvuru konusu olamaz. Ancak bireysel ba\u015fvuru kapsam\u0131ndaki hak ve \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fcklere m\u00fcdahale te\u015fkil eden, bariz takdir hatas\u0131 veya a\u00e7\u0131k bir keyf\u00eelik i\u00e7eren tespit ve sonu\u00e7lar bu kapsamda de\u011fildir (konuya ili\u015fkin bir\u00e7ok karar aras\u0131ndan bkz. Ahmet Sa\u011flam [2.B], B. No: 2013\/3351, 18\/9\/2013).<\/p>\n
22. Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucular, murislerinin ter\u00f6r olaylar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda \u00f6ld\u00fcr\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fc ileri s\u00fcrerek bu olay nedeniyle ya\u015fad\u0131klar\u0131 maddi ve manevi zararlar\u0131n tazminini talep etmi\u015ftir. S\u00f6z konusu talebin sadece 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda oldu\u011funun \u00f6zellikle vurgulanmas\u0131 gerekmektedir. \u0130dare Mahkemesi taraf\u0131ndan da talep do\u011frultusunda sadece 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun uyar\u0131nca inceleme yap\u0131larak ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n murislerinin \u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcne ili\u015fkin olarak \u00f6zetle olay\u0131n ter\u00f6r eyleminden kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde kesin bir tespite dayanmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kabul edilmi\u015ftir (karar\u0131n ayr\u0131nt\u0131lar\u0131 i\u00e7in bkz. \u00a7 6). Bu kapsamda \u0130dare Mahkemesi karar\u0131ndaki gerek\u00e7e ve ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n iddialar\u0131 g\u00f6z\u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, de\u011ferlendirme ve yorumlarda herhangi bir keyf\u00eeli\u011fin veya bariz takdir hatas\u0131n\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 de\u011ferlendirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n
23. Bu do\u011frultuda ba\u015fvurucular taraf\u0131ndan ileri s\u00fcr\u00fclen iddialar, yarg\u0131 mercilerince delillerin de\u011ferlendirilmesine ve hukuk kurallar\u0131n\u0131n yorumlanmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu de\u011ferlendirilerek mahkeme karar\u0131nda bariz takdir hatas\u0131 veya a\u00e7\u0131k bir keyf\u00eelik olu\u015fturan bir durumun da bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda ihlal iddialar\u0131n\u0131n kanun yolu \u015fik\u00e2yeti niteli\u011finde oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n \u015fik\u00e2yetlerinin a\u00e7\u0131k\u00e7a dayanaktan yoksun oldu\u011fu kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n
24. 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
C. Makul S\u00fcrede Yarg\u0131lanma Hakk\u0131n\u0131n \u0130hlal Edildi\u011fi \u0130ddias\u0131 Y\u00f6n\u00fcnden <\/p>\n
25. Ba\u015fvurucular, yarg\u0131laman\u0131n makul s\u00fcrede neticelendirilmedi\u011fini belirterek adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini ileri s\u00fcrm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<\/p>\n
26. Anayasa Mahkemesi, Veysi Ado ([GK] B. No: 2022\/100837, 27\/4\/2023) karar\u0131nda makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddias\u0131yla yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurularda uygulanacak anayasal ilkeleri belirlemi\u015f; 12\/3\/2024 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren 2\/3\/2024 tarihli ve 7499 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019la 9\/1\/2013 tarihli ve 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Avrupa \u0130nsan Haklar\u0131 Mahkemesine Yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015f Baz\u0131 Ba\u015fvurular\u0131n Tazminat \u00d6denmek Suretiyle \u00c7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcne Dair Kanun’da yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fiklikler \u00fczerine Ahmet Kartalku\u015f (B. No: 2019\/39635, 19\/3\/2024, \u00a7\u00a7 51-75) karar\u0131nda bu konuyu yeniden de\u011ferlendirmi\u015ftir. An\u0131lan kararda 7499 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’la 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’a eklenen 5\/A maddesi ve ayr\u0131ca an\u0131lan Kanun’un ge\u00e7ici 3. maddesinde yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fiklik gere\u011fi, 12\/3\/2024 tarihi itibar\u0131yla Anayasa Mahkemesinde derdest olan, yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n makul s\u00fcrede sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddias\u0131yla yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurulara ili\u015fkin olarak ilk bak\u0131\u015fta ula\u015f\u0131labilir ve ihlal iddialar\u0131yla ilgili ba\u015far\u0131 \u015fans\u0131 sunma ve yeterli giderim sa\u011flama kapasitesi oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclen Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru yolu t\u00fcketilmeden yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun incelenmesinin bireysel ba\u015fvurunun ikincil niteli\u011fi ile ba\u011fda\u015fmayaca\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir. Bu kapsamda 7499 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019la makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131na ili\u015fkin olarak Anayasa Mahkemesine bireysel ba\u015fvuru yap\u0131lmadan \u00f6nce do\u011frudan Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru imk\u00e2n\u0131 getirildi\u011fine de dikkat \u00e7ekilmi\u015f, 7499 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019la 6384 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019da yap\u0131lan de\u011fi\u015fiklik uyar\u0131nca, makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlali iddias\u0131yla ilgili Tazminat Komisyonuna ba\u015fvuru yolu etkili g\u00f6r\u00fclmekle do\u011frudan Anayasa Mahkemesine yap\u0131lan ba\u015fvurunun ikincillik ilkesinin gere\u011fi olarak, ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmedi\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmi\u015ftir. Somut ba\u015fvuruda da an\u0131lan kararda a\u00e7\u0131klanan ilkelerden ve ula\u015f\u0131lan sonu\u00e7tan ayr\u0131lmay\u0131 gerektiren bir durum bulunmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n
27. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle ba\u015fvurunun ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle kabul edilemez oldu\u011funa karar verilmesi gerekir.<\/p>\n
III. H\u00dcK\u00dcM<\/p>\n
A. 1. Ya\u015fam hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n s\u00fcre a\u015f\u0131m\u0131 nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
2. Hakkaniyete uygun 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. Makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fine ili\u015fkin iddian\u0131n ba\u015fvuru yollar\u0131n\u0131n t\u00fcketilmemesi nedeniyle KABUL ED\u0130LEMEZ OLDU\u011eUNA,<\/p>\n
B. Yarg\u0131lama giderlerinin ba\u015fvurucular \u00fczerinde BIRAKILMASINA 30\/10\/2024 tarihinde OYB\u0130RL\u0130\u011e\u0130YLE karar verildi.<\/p>\n
\u200bAnayasa Mahkemesi’nin 30\/10\/2024 tarihli ve 2020\/9098 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 AL\u0130 DO\u011eAN VE D\u0130\u011eERLER\u0130 BA\u015eVURUSU (Ba\u015fvuru Numaras\u0131: 2020\/9098) \u00a0 Karar Tarihi: 30\/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 : Hasan SARA\u00c7 Ba\u015fvurucular : 1. Ali DO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 2. Aynur TA\u015eKIRAN \u00a0 \u00a0 3. Ay\u015fe DO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 4. Elif DO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 5. Fatma ERCAN \u00a0 \u00a0 6. G\u00fcvercin ESER \u00a0 \u00a0 7. Aziz DO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 8. Ay\u015fe ANU\u015e \u00a0 \u00a0 9. Cennet DO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 10. \u0130mren DO\u011eAN \u00a0 \u00a0 11. Mehmet DO\u011eAN Vekili : Av. U\u011fur ER\u0130K \u00a0 I. BA\u015eVURUNUN \u00d6ZET\u0130 1. Ba\u015fvuru; 1993 y\u0131l\u0131nda meydana gelen silahl\u0131 sald\u0131r\u0131 sonucundaki \u00f6l\u00fcme ili\u015fkin etkili soru\u015fturma yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 nedeniyle ya\u015fam hakk\u0131n\u0131n, 17\/7\/2004 tarihli ve 5233 say\u0131l\u0131 Ter\u00f6r ve Ter\u00f6rle M\u00fccadeleden Do\u011fan Zararlar\u0131n Kar\u015f\u0131lanmas\u0131 Hakk\u0131nda Kanun kapsam\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n reddedilmesi nedeniyle hakkaniyete uygun yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ve yarg\u0131laman\u0131n uzun s\u00fcrmesi nedeniyle de makul s\u00fcrede yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fi iddialar\u0131na ili\u015fkindir. 2. Ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n murisi M.D., Pazarc\u0131k-Kahramanmara\u015f’ta bulunan Karaa\u011fa\u00e7 k\u00f6y\u00fcndeki evlerinde 1993 y\u0131l\u0131nda gece ge\u00e7 saatlerde kimli\u011fi belirsiz ki\u015fi veya ki\u015filer taraf\u0131ndan ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen silahl\u0131 sald\u0131r\u0131 sonucunda \u00f6lm\u00fc\u015f, ba\u015fvurucu Ay\u015fe Do\u011fan ise …<\/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-30945","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-hukukihaber"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n