{"id":210724,"date":"2015-04-28T18:13:09","date_gmt":"2015-04-28T15:13:09","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/?p=210724"},"modified":"2015-04-28T18:13:09","modified_gmt":"2015-04-28T15:13:09","slug":"tahliye-skandalinda-son-durum-yeni-hakim-kararlari-yok-hukmunde-saydi-210724","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/tahliye-skandalinda-son-durum-yeni-hakim-kararlari-yok-hukmunde-saydi-210724\/","title":{"rendered":"Tahliye skandal\u0131nda son durum: Yeni hakim kararlar\u0131 ‘yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde’ sayd\u0131"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/p>\n

\u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde ge\u00e7ici olarak g\u00f6revlendirilen hakim Erdo\u011fan \u015eim\u015fek, paralel yap\u0131 \u015f\u00fcphelileri\u00a0hakk\u0131nda yetkisiz olarak verilen tahliye kararlar\u0131n\u0131n “yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde” say\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verdi.<\/h1>\n

“Paralel yap\u0131” soru\u015fturmalar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda tutuklu bulunan \u015f\u00fcphelilerle ilgili yetkisiz olarak tahliye karar\u0131 veren \u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi hakimi Mustafa Ba\u015fer’in, Hakimler ve Savc\u0131lar Y\u00fcksek Kurulu (HSYK) taraf\u0131ndan a\u00e7\u0131\u011fa al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n ard\u0131ndan mahkemeye ge\u00e7ici olarak hakim Erdo\u011fan \u015eim\u015fek g\u00f6revlendirildi.<\/p>\n

Hakim \u015eim\u015fek, \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ter\u00f6r ve \u00d6rg\u00fctl\u00fc Su\u00e7lar B\u00fcrosu’nun, \u015f\u00fcphelilerle ilgili verilen tahliye kararlar\u0131n\u0131n yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde say\u0131lmas\u0131, kararlar\u0131n \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131’ndan geri istenmesi ve tahliye m\u00fczekkerelerini teslim al\u0131p cezaevine faks \u00e7ekmeyen yetkililer hakk\u0131nda su\u00e7 duyurusunda bulunmas\u0131na ili\u015fkin karar\u0131n geri istenilmesi talebini de\u011ferlendirerek yeni bir karar verdi.<\/p>\n

Kararda, Ceza Muhakemesi Kanunu’nun (CMK) ilgili maddelerinin irdelendi\u011fi belirtilerek, “Haz\u0131rl\u0131k soru\u015fturmalar\u0131nda hakim taraf\u0131ndan verilmesi gerekli kararlar\u0131 almak, i\u015fleri yapmak, bunlar\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131 yap\u0131lan itirazlar\u0131 incelemek, m\u00fcnhas\u0131ran sulh ceza hakimli\u011fine aittir. Bu c\u00fcmleden, asliye ceza mahkemelerinin soru\u015fturma a\u015famas\u0131ndaki i\u015flerle ilgili tutuklama ve tahliye karar\u0131 verme yetkileri olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 a\u015fikard\u0131r” denildi.<\/p>\n

– “Reddi hakimi gerektirecek durum yok”<\/p>\n

\u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nin reddi hakim ve tahliye taleplerini de\u011ferlendirerek bir karar verildi\u011fi hat\u0131rlat\u0131lan kararda, “Bilindi\u011fi \u00fczere haz\u0131rl\u0131k soru\u015fturmas\u0131nda dosyan\u0131n mahkemede bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, dosya yetkilisinin ve g\u00f6revlisinin Cumhuriyet ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 oldu\u011fu hukuk sistemimizde Cumhuriyet savc\u0131lar\u0131n\u0131n reddi m\u00fcessesinin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, somut olayda hakimin reddi konusunu te\u015fkil edecek hukuki bir durumun bulunmad\u0131\u011f\u0131” ifade edildi.<\/p>\n

Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ceza \u0130\u015fleri Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’n\u00fcn usul ve yasa uygun g\u00f6r\u00fclen 6 \u015eubat 2015 tarihli g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f talebini i\u00e7erir 6 sayfadan ibaret yaz\u0131s\u0131na at\u0131fta bulunulan kararda, hakimin reddi talebini de\u011ferlendiren \u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi karar\u0131 ile bu mahkemenin tahliye karar\u0131n\u0131n hukuki dayanaktan yoksun oldu\u011fu kaydedildi.<\/p>\n

Kararda, 25 ve 27 Nisan’da tahliye kararlar\u0131 veren bu mahkemenin g\u00f6revsiz oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in karar\u0131n da yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde say\u0131lmas\u0131 gerekti\u011finin anla\u015f\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 vurgulanarak, Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n itirazlar\u0131n\u0131n yerinde g\u00f6r\u00fcld\u00fc\u011f\u00fc ve tahliye karar\u0131n\u0131n “yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde” say\u0131lmas\u0131na ve \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131’ndan geri istenilmesine h\u00fckmedildi\u011fi aktar\u0131ld\u0131.<\/p>\n

\u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ter\u00f6r ve \u00d6rg\u00fctl\u00fc Su\u00e7lar B\u00fcrosu’nun talebinin kabul edildi\u011fi kararda, 25 Nisan ve 27 Nisan’da verilen tahliye kararlar\u0131n\u0131n usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu i\u00e7in yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde say\u0131lmas\u0131na, tahliye kararlar\u0131n\u0131n istenilmesi i\u00e7in m\u00fczekkere yaz\u0131lmas\u0131na h\u00fckmedildi.<\/p>\n

– S\u00fcre\u00e7<\/p>\n

\u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131’nca 22 Temmuz 2014’ten beri s\u00fcrd\u00fcr\u00fclen “casusluk, yasa d\u0131\u015f\u0131 dinleme, 25 Aral\u0131k kumpas\u0131, ‘Selam Tevhid’de kumpas, Tah\u015fiye grubuna y\u00f6nelik kumpas ve emniyetteki paralel yap\u0131” soru\u015fturmalar\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda tutuklu bulunan, aralar\u0131nda eski emniyet m\u00fcd\u00fcrleri Tufan Erg\u00fcder, Ali Fuat Y\u0131lmazer, Yurt Atay\u00fcn, Yakup Sayg\u0131l\u0131, \u00d6mer K\u00f6se, Ertan Er\u00e7\u0131kt\u0131, Erol Demirhan, Serdar Bayraktutan ve Samanyolu Yay\u0131n Grubu Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Hidayet Karaca’n\u0131n da bulundu\u011fu \u015f\u00fcphelilerin avukatlar\u0131 ile Hrant Dink cinayeti soru\u015fturmas\u0131 kapsam\u0131nda tutuklanan eski Emniyet Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc \u0130stihbarat Daire Ba\u015fkan\u0131 Ramazan Aky\u00fcrek’in avukat\u0131, \u0130stanbul Adliyesi’nde g\u00f6revli 10 sulh ceza hakiminin reddi ile tutuklu t\u00fcm \u015f\u00fcphelilerin tahliyesini i\u00e7eren dilek\u00e7eleri, 20 Nisan’da yetkisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde \u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’ne sunmu\u015ftu.<\/p>\n

Bu itirazlara bakma yetkisi olmamas\u0131na ra\u011fmen talepleri kabul ederek harekete ge\u00e7en \u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi Hakimi Metin \u00d6z\u00e7elik, 21 Nisan’da soru\u015fturmalar\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten savc\u0131lardan soru\u015fturma dosyalar\u0131n\u0131 istemi\u015f, sulh ceza hakimlerinden de reddi taleplerine ili\u015fkin savunma istemi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

– Savc\u0131lar ve hakimlerden ret<\/p>\n

“Paralel yap\u0131”ya ili\u015fkin soru\u015fturmalar\u0131 y\u00fcr\u00fcten savc\u0131lar ise \u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nin bu konuda yetkili olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ifade ederek, soru\u015fturma dosyalar\u0131n\u0131 g\u00f6ndermemi\u015f ve konuyla ilgili Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ceza \u0130\u015fleri Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’n\u00fcn yaz\u0131s\u0131n\u0131 hakim \u00d6z\u00e7elik’e g\u00f6ndermi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

Reddi istenen sulh ceza hakimleri de \u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi Hakimi Metin \u00d6z\u00e7elik’e cevaben, yetkisinin olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, reddi hakim taleplerini i\u00e7eren dilek\u00e7eleri kendilerine g\u00f6ndermesini istemi\u015fti. Ancak \u00d6z\u00e7elik, bu dilek\u00e7eleri g\u00f6ndermemi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

Bunun \u00fczerine hakim \u00d6z\u00e7elik, \u0130stanbul Adliyesi’nde g\u00f6revli bulunan t\u00fcm sulh ceza hakimlerin reddine karar vermi\u015f, tahliye konusunda dilek\u00e7eleri ise \u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’ne g\u00f6ndermi\u015fti. \u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi Hakimi Mustafa Ba\u015fer de ”paralel yap\u0131” soru\u015fturmalar\u0131nda tutuklu t\u00fcm \u015f\u00fcphelilerin tahliyesine karar vermi\u015fti. Bu kararlar\u0131n ard\u0131ndan, \u0130stanbul 10. Sulh Ceza Hakimli\u011fi de \u0130stanbul 29. ve 32. asliye ceza mahkemelerinin ald\u0131\u011f\u0131 kararlar\u0131n\u0131n usul ve yasaya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011funu belirterek, kararlar\u0131n “yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde” oldu\u011funa karar vermi\u015fti. Hakimlik ayr\u0131ca t\u00fcm tutuklu \u015f\u00fcphelilerin, tahliye taleplerini reddetmi\u015f ve bu hallerinin devam\u0131na h\u00fckmetmi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

Tutuklular\u0131n avukatlar\u0131, \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131 \u0130nfaz ve \u0130lamat B\u00fcrosu N\u00f6bet\u00e7i Savc\u0131s\u0131 Orhan G\u00fcldiker’e, \u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nin “yetkisi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 halde” tahliye karar\u0131 vermesinin ard\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan m\u00fczekkereleri i\u015fleme koymas\u0131 i\u00e7in ba\u015fvurmu\u015ftu. Savc\u0131 G\u00fcldiker de \u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nce verilen tahliye m\u00fczekkerelerini mahkemesine iade etmi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

HSYK da \u0130stanbul 29. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi Hakimi Metin \u00d6z\u00e7elik ile \u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi Hakimi Mustafa Ba\u015fer hakk\u0131nda inceleme ba\u015flatm\u0131\u015ft\u0131.<\/p>\n

– Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131n yaz\u0131s\u0131<\/p>\n

Adalet Bakanl\u0131\u011f\u0131 Ceza \u0130\u015fleri Genel M\u00fcd\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011f\u00fc’n\u00fcn 6 \u015eubat’ta \u0130stanbul Cumhuriyet Ba\u015fsavc\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131’na g\u00f6nderdi\u011fi yaz\u0131da, asliye ceza mahkemelerinin sulh ceza mahkemeleri kararlar\u0131na bakamayaca\u011f\u0131, sulh ceza hakimlikleri taraf\u0131ndan al\u0131nan kararlara ili\u015fkin itirazlar\u0131 de\u011ferlendirme makam\u0131n\u0131n yine sulh ceza hakimlikleri oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015fti.<\/p>\n

Tutuklamaya ili\u015fkin karar hakk\u0131nda sulh ceza hakiminden ba\u015fka birinin karar vermesinin yasal olmayaca\u011f\u0131 vurgulanan yaz\u0131da, ayr\u0131ca hakimin reddi m\u00fcessesesinin, bir adliyede bulunan t\u00fcm hakimlerin toplu olarak reddi anlam\u0131nda kullan\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n m\u00fcmk\u00fcn olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kaydedilmi\u015fti. (AA)<\/p>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u0130stanbul 32. Asliye Ceza Mahkemesi’nde ge\u00e7ici olarak g\u00f6revlendirilen hakim Erdo\u011fan \u015eim\u015fek, paralel yap\u0131 \u015f\u00fcphelileri hakk\u0131nda yetkisiz olarak verilen tahliye kararlar\u0131n\u0131n “yok h\u00fckm\u00fcnde” say\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verdi.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":210726,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6155,5005,6202,349,6805],"tags":[152908,151223,189066,27382],"class_list":["post-210724","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-gundem","category-manset","category-politika","category-son-dakika","category-turkiye","tag-asliye-ceza-mahkemesi","tag-paralel-yapi","tag-paralel-yapi-tahliye","tag-son-dakika"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210724","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=210724"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/210724\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/210726"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=210724"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=210724"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.nationalturk.com\/tr\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=210724"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}