CHP<\/a> \u0130stanbul \u0130l Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Canan Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu’nun bunu ikrar etti\u011fini ve kamuoyuyla payla\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 kaydetti. Dilek\u00e7ede, Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu’nun farkl\u0131 tarihlerde yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 14 payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131nda Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Erdo\u011fan’a y\u00f6nelik hakaret i\u00e7eren ifadeler kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 gerek\u00e7esiyle her bir payla\u015f\u0131m i\u00e7in 50 bin lira olmak \u00fczere toplam 700 bin lira manevi tazminata mahkum edilmesi istendi.<\/p>\n ERDO\u011eAN’IN AVUKATLARI KARARA \u0130T\u0130RAZ ETT\u0130<\/h2>\n
\u0130stinaf\u0131n karar\u0131nda, davaya bakan B\u00fcy\u00fck\u00e7ekmece 6. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin dosyaya ili\u015fkin h\u00fckm\u00fcnde, bir k\u0131s\u0131m payla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131n ifade h\u00fcrriyeti s\u0131n\u0131rlar\u0131n\u0131 a\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve Erdo\u011fan’\u0131n ki\u015filik hakk\u0131na kar\u015f\u0131 a\u011f\u0131r hakaretler i\u00e7erdi\u011fi belirtilerek, bunlar\u0131n ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc kapsam\u0131nda de\u011ferlendirilmesinin m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 sonucuna var\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 kaydedildi.<\/p>\n
Davay\u0131 k\u0131smen kabul eden mahkemenin Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu’nu 56 bin lira manevi tazminat \u00f6demeye mahkum etti\u011fi bilgisi verilen kararda, davac\u0131 Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Erdo\u011fan’\u0131n avukatlar\u0131 Ferah Y\u0131ld\u0131z ve \u00dcmit Kudbay taraf\u0131ndan karara itiraz edildi\u011fi belirtildi.<\/p>\n
Kararda, itiraz dilek\u00e7esindeki \u015fu ifadeler yer ald\u0131:<\/p>\n
“Davaya konu payla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131n t\u00fcm\u00fc hakaret niteli\u011findedir. Baz\u0131 s\u00f6zlerin a\u011f\u0131r ele\u015ftiri kabul edilmesi yanl\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. T\u00fcrkiye Cumhuriyeti Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131’na yap\u0131lan hakaretler a\u011f\u0131r ele\u015ftiri olmay\u0131p, hukukun dahi himaye edemeyece\u011fi a\u011f\u0131r hakaretlerdir. H\u00fckmedilen tazminat miktar\u0131, m\u00fcvekkilin ki\u015filik haklar\u0131n\u0131n ihlali suretiyle meydana gelen zarar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131layamayacak kadar azd\u0131r. Bu nedenle her bir payla\u015f\u0131m i\u00e7in ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 davan\u0131n aynen kabul\u00fc gerekirken, karar\u0131n kald\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131 talep ederiz.”<\/p>\n
Kararda, davac\u0131 Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Erdo\u011fan’\u0131n avukat\u0131n\u0131n, birbirinden ba\u011f\u0131ms\u0131z birden fazla asli talebini ayn\u0131 dava dilek\u00e7esinde ileri s\u00fcrd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc, bu durumda davac\u0131n\u0131n her bir talebinin ayr\u0131 ayr\u0131 de\u011ferlendirip karara ba\u011flanmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi, bu nedenle istinaf talebinin yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc belirtildi.<\/p>\n
Daval\u0131 Canan Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu hakk\u0131nda, dava konusu payla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131 nedeniyle \u0130stanbul 37. A\u011f\u0131r Ceza Mahkemesince “Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131’na alenen hakaret”, “halk\u0131 kin ve d\u00fc\u015fmanl\u0131\u011fa alenen tahrik etme”, “silahl\u0131 ter\u00f6r \u00f6rg\u00fct\u00fcn\u00fcn propagandas\u0131n\u0131 yapmak”, “kamu g\u00f6revlisine alenen hakaret etmek” ve “T\u00fcrkiye Cumhuriyeti Devleti’ni alenen a\u015fa\u011f\u0131lamak” su\u00e7lar\u0131ndan mahkumiyet karar\u0131 verildi\u011fi aktar\u0131lan kararda, bu karar\u0131n da istinaf denetiminden ge\u00e7ti\u011fi kaydedildi. <\/p>\n
“\u0130FADE \u00d6ZG\u00dcRL\u00dc\u011e\u00dc, K\u0130\u015e\u0130LER\u0130N \u0130T\u0130BARINA ZARAR VERECEK BOYUTA ULA\u015eMAMALI”<\/h2>\n
Dairenin karar\u0131nda, ifade a\u00e7\u0131klama \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn s\u0131n\u0131rs\u0131z olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 vurgulanarak, \u015fu de\u011ferlendirmede bulunuldu:<\/p>\n
“Ba\u015fta siyasi ki\u015filer olmak \u00fczere ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn, ki\u015filerin itibar\u0131na zarar verecek boyuta ula\u015fmamas\u0131 gerekir. Bu gereklilik, temel hak ve h\u00fcrriyetlerin ki\u015finin topluma, ailesine ve di\u011fer ki\u015filere kar\u015f\u0131 \u00f6dev ve sorumluluklar\u0131n\u0131 da ihtiva etti\u011fini belirten Anayasa’n\u0131n 12. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131ndan do\u011fan bir zorunluluktur. Bu itibarla, Anayasa’n\u0131n 26. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131na g\u00f6re, ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn s\u0131n\u0131rland\u0131r\u0131lma nedenlerinden biri de ba\u015fkalar\u0131n\u0131n \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131d\u0131r. Kamuya mal olmu\u015f ki\u015filerin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131 ile ifade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn \u00e7at\u0131\u015fmas\u0131 halinde bu iki hak aras\u0131nda makul bir denge kurulmal\u0131d\u0131r. Dengeleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken; dava konusu a\u00e7\u0131klaman\u0131n kamu yarar\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir tart\u0131\u015fmaya sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 katk\u0131, ilgili ki\u015finin tan\u0131n\u0131rl\u0131\u011f\u0131, toplumdaki rol\u00fc ve i\u015fleviyle yaz\u0131ya konu olan faaliyetin niteli\u011fi, a\u00e7\u0131klama veya yay\u0131n\u0131n konusu, kapsam\u0131, \u015fekli ve etkileri, ilgili ki\u015finin daha \u00f6nceki davran\u0131\u015flar\u0131, bilgilerin elde edilme ko\u015fullar\u0131 ve ger\u00e7ekli\u011fiyle uygulanan yapt\u0131r\u0131m\u0131n niteli\u011fi g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nmal\u0131d\u0131r. \u0130fade \u00f6zg\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fcn\u00fcn s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131, ki\u015filerin \u015feref ve itibar\u0131n\u0131n korunmas\u0131 hakk\u0131d\u0131r. \u00c7at\u0131\u015fan bu iki hak aras\u0131nda dengeleme yap\u0131l\u0131rken \u00f6ncelikle dava konusu payla\u015f\u0131mlar\u0131n davac\u0131ya ili\u015fkin b\u00f6l\u00fcm\u00fcn\u00fcn, kamuoyunu ilgilendiren ve kamunun yarar\u0131na ili\u015fkin bir tart\u0131\u015fmaya katk\u0131 sa\u011flay\u0131p sa\u011flamad\u0131\u011f\u0131na bak\u0131lmal\u0131d\u0131r.”<\/p>\n
\u0130ST\u0130NAF, VER\u0130LEN TAZM\u0130NAT M\u0130KTARINI AZ BULDU<\/h2>\n
Manevi tazminat\u0131n miktar\u0131n\u0131n bir ceza olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi mal varl\u0131\u011f\u0131 hukukuna ili\u015fkin bir zarar\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131lanmas\u0131n\u0131 da ama\u00e7 edinmedi\u011fi vurgulanan kararda, “O halde bu tazminat\u0131n s\u0131n\u0131r\u0131 onun amac\u0131na g\u00f6re belirlenmelidir. Takdir edilecek miktar, mevcut halde elde edilmek istenilen tatmin duygusunun etkisine ula\u015fmak i\u00e7in gerekli olan kadar olmal\u0131d\u0131r.” denildi.<\/p>\n
Kararda, dava konusu olayda ise, olay\u0131n geli\u015fimi ve tarihi, taraflar\u0131n konumu, daval\u0131n\u0131n kulland\u0131\u011f\u0131 ifadeler, eylemin davac\u0131 \u00fczerindeki etkisi ve s\u00f6z konusu ilkeler g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, davac\u0131 Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Erdo\u011fan yarar\u0131na h\u00fckmedilen manevi tazminat miktar\u0131n\u0131n az oldu\u011fu a\u00e7\u0131kland\u0131.<\/p>\n
TAZM\u0130NATI 290 B\u0130N L\u0130RAYA \u00c7IKARDI<\/h2>\n
Daire, Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Erdo\u011fan’\u0131n avukat\u0131n\u0131n istinaf isteminin yerinde oldu\u011funu belirterek, B\u00fcy\u00fck\u00e7ekmece 6. Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesinin karar\u0131n\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131p, yeniden h\u00fck\u00fcm kurdu.<\/p>\n
Bu kapsamda daval\u0131 Canan Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu hakk\u0131nda hakaret i\u00e7eren 14 ayr\u0131 payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 i\u00e7in 50 biner liradan olma olmak \u00fczere toplam 700 bin lira olarak a\u00e7\u0131lan davan\u0131n k\u0131smen kabul\u00fcne karar veren daire, daval\u0131 Canan Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu’nun sosyal medyadan yapt\u0131\u011f\u0131 14 payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131ndan biri i\u00e7in 50 bin lira, 6 ayr\u0131 payla\u015f\u0131m\u0131 i\u00e7in de 40 biner lira olmak \u00fczere toplam 290 bin lira manevi tazminat\u0131n Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Erdo\u011fan’a \u00f6demesine karar verdi.<\/p>\n
Oy birli\u011fiyle al\u0131nan karar, Yarg\u0131taya temyiz edilebilecek.<\/p>\n
Kaynak: AA<\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
\u0130stanbul B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi 4. Hukuk Dairesi, CHP \u0130stanbul \u0130l Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Canan\u00a0Kaftanc\u0131o\u011flu’na Cumhurba\u015fkan\u0131 Recep Tayyip Erdo\u011fan’a sosyal medya hesab\u0131ndan hakaret…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":29976,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[12,15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-29975","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-gundem","category-turkiye"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29975","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=29975"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/29975\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/29976"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=29975"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=29975"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=29975"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}
![](\"https:\/\/istanbulchannel.net\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/12\/istinaf-canan-kaftancioglunun-cumhurbaskani-erdogana-odeyecegi-tazminati-290-bin-liraya-cikardi.jpg\")
<\/p>\n