{"id":1611,"date":"2016-05-31T16:26:58","date_gmt":"2016-05-31T13:26:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/?p=1611"},"modified":"2016-06-09T14:51:41","modified_gmt":"2016-06-09T11:51:41","slug":"turkcellin-ensar-vakfi-elestirileri-ile-ilgili-aldirdigi-sansur-kararini-anayasa-mahkemesine-tasidik","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/?p=1611","title":{"rendered":"Turkcell’in Ensar Vakf\u0131 Ele\u015ftirileri ile ilgili Ald\u0131rd\u0131\u011f\u0131 Sans\u00fcr Karar\u0131n\u0131 Anayasa Mahkemesi’ne ta\u015f\u0131d\u0131k"},"content":{"rendered":"

31 May\u0131s 2016 Bas\u0131n Duyurusu<\/strong><\/p>\n

Turkcell’in talebi ile \u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi<\/strong> taraf\u0131ndan 5651 say\u0131l\u0131 yasan\u0131n 9\/3 maddesi gere\u011fince 2016\/2091 D.I\u0307s\u0327 say\u0131l\u0131 ve 01.04.2016 tarihli karar\u0131yla 743 Twitter kullan\u0131c\u0131s\u0131na ait 862 tweet hakk\u0131nda eri\u015fimin engellemesi karar\u0131 verilmi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

\"karar_sayfa1\"<\/a>\"Karar_sayfa_son\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Hakimlik, karar\u0131nda, genel olarak talep eden Turkcell \u015firketi hakk\u0131nda \u201ctoplum nezdindeki konum ve sayg\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 zedeleyici, k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc i\u00e7erikler oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr<\/em>\u201d tespitinin yan\u0131 s\u0131ra alt alta s\u0131ralanan 862 tweetin neden eri\u015fime engellenmesi gerekti\u011fi hususunda hi\u00e7 bir gerek\u00e7e belirtmemi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

\u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi\u2019nin eri\u015fim engelleme karar\u0131na \u0130stanbul Bilgi \u00dcniversitesi \u00d6\u011fretim \u00dcyesi Prof. Dr. Yaman Akdeniz ve Ankara \u00dcniversitesi \u00d6\u011fretim \u00dcyesi Yrd. Do\u00e7. Dr.Kerem Alt\u0131parmak taraf\u0131ndan 18.04.2016 tarihinde itiraz edildi.<\/p>\n

Akdeniz ve Alt\u0131parmak’\u0131n itiraz\u0131n\u0131 \u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi\u2019nin ek karar\u0131 ile birlikte de\u011ferlendiren \u0130stanbul Anadolu 5. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi de 2016\/2300 D.\u0130\u015f. say\u0131l\u0131 ve 21.04.2016 tarihli karar\u0131 ile \u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi\u2019nin 2016\/2091 D.\u0130\u015f say\u0131l\u0131 ve 01.04.2016 tarihli karar\u0131nda \u201cusule, yasaya ve olu\u015fa ayk\u0131r\u0131 bir y\u00f6n bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan<\/em>\u201d gerek\u00e7esiyle reddetmi\u015ftir. Karar 02.05.2016 tarihinde tebli\u011f edilmi\u015f ve kesinle\u015fmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n

31 May\u0131s 2016 tarihinde kesinle\u015fen bu karar ile ilgili olarak Akdeniz ve Alt\u0131parmak taraf\u0131ndan Anayasa Mahkemesi’ne bireysel ba\u015fvuru yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ba\u015fvuruda \u00f6zetle:<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. Kategoriksel olarak \u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi taraf\u0131ndan 743 Twitter kullan\u0131c\u0131s\u0131na ait 862 tweetin birden engellenmesiyle ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n, Anayasa madde 26 ve A\u0130HS madde 10 ile g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nm\u0131\u015f ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131na giren \u201chaber ve bilgi alma hakk\u0131\u201d ihlal edildi\u011fi iddia edilmi\u015ftir.<\/li>\n
  2. Yeterli bir yarg\u0131sal incelemeden ge\u00e7irilmemi\u015f, eksik ve yetersiz nitelikte olan gerek\u00e7esiz kararlarla, kararlardan etkilenen ba\u015fvurucular dahil herkesin adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131 ihlal edilmi\u015ftir.<\/li>\n
  3. Ba\u015fvuru dilek\u00e7esinde a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u00fczere sulh ceza hakimlikleri verdikleri hi\u00e7bir eri\u015fim engelleme karar\u0131nda gerek\u00e7e vermemekte, ba\u015fvuruyu ilgilisine tebli\u011f etmemekte, ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fctlerini hi\u00e7bir \u015fekilde dikkate almamaktad\u0131r. Ayn\u0131 hakimlerden \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f y\u00fczlerce karar\u0131n tamam\u0131 benzer ihlallere v\u00fccut vermektedir. Anayasa Mahkemesi i\u015fbu ba\u015fvuruda ihlal tespit etse bile ayn\u0131 uygulama binlerce yeni ihlale v\u00fccut verecektir. Bu durumda, ya bu ihlallerin tamam\u0131n\u0131n Anayasa Mahkemesi \u00f6n\u00fcne gelmesi ya da ihlal olarak kalmas\u0131 tehlikesi vard\u0131r. Her iki durumun da bireysel \u015fikayet mekanizmas\u0131n\u0131n ama\u00e7lar\u0131na ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131r<\/strong>. Bu nedenle, i\u015fbu ba\u015fvurunun pilot dava y\u00f6ntemine<\/strong> uygun olarak incelenmesi, belirlenecek ilkelerin t\u00fcm ba\u015fvurular a\u00e7\u0131s\u0131ndan uygulanmas\u0131 i\u00e7in sulh ceza hakimliklerine g\u00f6nderilerek, gere\u011finin yap\u0131lmamas\u0131 halinde di\u011fer ba\u015fvurular\u0131n da s\u00fcratle sonu\u00e7land\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcn\u00fclmektedir. A\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7elerle, ba\u015fvurunun \u0130\u00e7t\u00fcz\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn 75. maddesi uyar\u0131nca pilot dava usul\u00fcne g\u00f6re incelenmesi talep edilmi\u015ftir.
    \n<\/strong><\/li>\n
  4. \u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi, eri\u015fim engelleme karar\u0131n\u0131n gerek\u00e7esi olarak Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesini g\u00f6stermi\u015ftir. Anayasa Mahkemesi\u2019nin, bu kapsamda Devletin pozitif bir y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc oldu\u011funu d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcnd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc bilinmektedir. Mahkeme\u2019ye g\u00f6re, \u201cbireyin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 17. maddesinde yer alan \u201cmanevi varl\u0131k<\/em>\u201d kapsam\u0131nda yer almaktad\u0131r. Oysa \u015fikayet konusu Hakimlik karar\u0131nda ger\u00e7ek bir ki\u015finin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131 s\u00f6z konusu olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi manevi varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan da bahsedilemeyecektir<\/strong>. Bu nedenle, 17. maddenin me\u015fru bir sebep olarak g\u00f6sterilmesinin de m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/li>\n
  5. Hakimlik karar\u0131 ile eri\u015fime engellenen i\u00e7eriklerin siyasi tart\u0131\u015fma ortam\u0131na katk\u0131s\u0131n\u0131n olduk\u00e7a y\u00fcksek oldu\u011fu da ba\u015fvuruda vurgulanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu nedenle ba\u015fvuru konusu karar ile eri\u015fime engellenen i\u00e7eriklerin yay\u0131nlanmas\u0131nda kamu yarar\u0131 oldu\u011fu ve demokratik bir toplumda gerekli olmayan bir engellemenin s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir.<\/li>\n
  6. Hem Anayasam\u0131z hem de A\u0130HM i\u00e7tihatlar\u0131 ile belirlendi\u011fi \u00fczere, bir temel hakk\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131rlanmas\u0131 y\u00f6n\u00fcnde verilen karar\u0131n \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesine de uygun olmas\u0131 gerekir. \u00d6l\u00e7\u00fcl\u00fcl\u00fck ilkesinin alt unsurlar\u0131ndan biri de elveri\u015fliliktir. Bu kapsamda, Turkcell \u015firketi Twitter platformundaki ele\u015ftirilerin nas\u0131l bir \u015fekilde \u015firketi zarara u\u011fratt\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6sterebilmi\u015f de\u011fildir. Hakimlik karar\u0131nda da \u015firketin ne \u015fekilde zarar g\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc a\u00e7\u0131klanmam\u0131\u015f veya gerek\u00e7elendirilmemi\u015ftir. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla, ba\u015fvurucular\u0131n haber alma, bilgi edinme ve ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcne 862 adresin ve i\u00e7eri\u011fin engellenmesi yoluyla yap\u0131lan m\u00fcdahalenin demokratik bir toplumda gerekli olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 iddia edilmi\u015ftir.<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Ge\u00e7ti\u011fimiz haftalarda Turkcell taraf\u0131ndan y\u00fczlerce ve hatta binlerce i\u00e7eri\u011fe \u00e7ok say\u0131da Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi karar\u0131 ile eri\u015fimin engellendi\u011fi bilinmektedir. Bu kararlar elimiz ge\u00e7tik\u00e7e, hepsine tek tek itiraz edece\u011fimizi ve konunun takip\u00e7ileri oldu\u011fumuzu kamuoyunun bilgisine sunar\u0131z.<\/p>\n

    Yaman Akdeniz & Kerem Alt\u0131parmak<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

    31 May\u0131s 2016 Bas\u0131n Duyurusu Turkcell’in talebi ile \u0130stanbul Anadolu 4. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi taraf\u0131ndan 5651 say\u0131l\u0131 yasan\u0131n 9\/3 maddesi gere\u011fince 2016\/2091 D.I\u0307s\u0327 say\u0131l\u0131 ve 01.04.2016 tarihli karar\u0131yla 743 Twitter kullan\u0131c\u0131s\u0131na ait 862 tweet hakk\u0131nda eri\u015fimin engellemesi karar\u0131 verilmi\u015fti.   Hakimlik, karar\u0131nda, genel olarak talep eden Turkcell \u015firketi hakk\u0131nda \u201ctoplum nezdindeki konum ve sayg\u0131nl\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 zedeleyici, k\u00fc\u00e7\u00fck d\u00fc\u015f\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc i\u00e7erikler oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr\u201d…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":1612,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","default_image_id":0,"font":"","enabled":false},"version":2}},"categories":[153,5,161,209,21,190,142,3,208,78],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1611","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-9-madde","category-dusunce-ozgurlugu","category-elestiri","category-ensar-vakfi","category-erisim-engelleme","category-ifade-ozgurlugu","category-kerem-altiparmak","category-sansur","category-turkcell","category-yaman-akdeniz"],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/05\/Ensar_map.jpg?fit=2098%2C1056&ssl=1","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p7wjA8-pZ","jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1611","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1611"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1611\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1626,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1611\/revisions\/1626"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/1612"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1611"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1611"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/privacy.cyber-rights.org.tr\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1611"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}