[vc_row][vc_column width=”1\/6″][\/vc_column][vc_column width=”2\/3″][vc_column_text]<\/p>\n
(Anayasa Mahkemesi Karar\u0131-Ba\u015fvuru No: 2019\/145-Resmi Gazete Tarihi: 05.04.2022)<\/p>\n
A. \u0130DD\u0130ALAR<\/strong><\/p>\n Ba\u015fvurucu, fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccretinin \u00f6denmemesi nedeniyle m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131n\u0131n ihlal edildi\u011fini iddia etmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n B. MAHKEMEN\u0130N DE\u011eERLEND\u0130RMES\u0130<\/strong><\/p>\n Derece mahkemelerinin kararlar\u0131nda 4857 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 41. maddesinde fazla saatlerle \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmak i\u00e7in i\u015f\u00e7inin onay\u0131n\u0131n al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi h\u00fckm\u00fcne yer verilmi\u015ftir. 4857 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 41. maddesine dayan\u0131larak \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan Y\u00f6netmelik’in 9. maddesinin ikinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaya ihtiyac\u0131 olan i\u015fverence bu onay\u0131n her y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7ilerden yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak al\u0131nmas\u0131 gerekti\u011fi d\u00fczenlenmi\u015f iken 25\/8\/2017 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren de\u011fi\u015fiklikle her y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda onay alma \u015fart\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015f, i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinin yap\u0131lmas\u0131 esnas\u0131nda onay verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 yeterli h\u00e2le getirilmi\u015ftir.<\/p>\n 4758 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 41. maddesinin yedinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda ve Y\u00f6netmelik’in 9. maddesinin her iki versiyonunda yer alan onay \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmaya y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu g\u00f6r\u00fclmektedir. Fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaya onay verilmesinin fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccretinden de feragat edilmi\u015f say\u0131laca\u011f\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelebilecek bir d\u00fczenleme, an\u0131lan kurallarda yer almamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n B\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesi karar\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131kl\u0131k bulunmasa da ba\u015fvurucunun hizmet s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki onay\u0131n\u0131n fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma i\u00e7in as\u0131l \u00fccreti d\u0131\u015f\u0131nda ayr\u0131ca \u00fccret talep edilmemesini de i\u00e7erdi\u011fi kabul\u00fcnden hareket edildi\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr. Anayasa’n\u0131n 35. maddesinde g\u00fcvence alt\u0131na al\u0131nan m\u00fclkiyet hakk\u0131 malikin fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccretinden feragat etmesini kural olarak yasaklamamaktad\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla i\u015f\u00e7inin fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmas\u0131n\u0131n kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131n as\u0131l \u00fccretine d\u00e2hil oldu\u011funu i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesinde kabul etmi\u015f olmas\u0131na dayan\u0131larak lehine fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccretine h\u00fckmedilmemesi kural olarak Anayasa’n\u0131n 35. maddesini ihlal etmez. Ancak i\u015f\u00e7inin fazladan \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n kanuna uygun olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 h\u00e2llerde \u00f6nceden verilmi\u015f r\u0131zan\u0131n varl\u0131\u011f\u0131ndan hareketle fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccretinden feragat edildi\u011fi \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131m\u0131 yap\u0131lamaz. Zira feragatin ge\u00e7erli olabilmesi i\u00e7in feragat iradesinin a\u00e7\u0131k olmas\u0131n\u0131n ve sonu\u00e7lar\u0131n\u0131n ki\u015fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden makul olarak \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir bulunmas\u0131n\u0131n yan\u0131nda asgari usul g\u00fcvencelerinin de sa\u011flanm\u0131\u015f olmas\u0131, ayr\u0131ca haktan feragat edilmesini me\u015fru olmaktan \u00e7\u0131karan \u00fcst\u00fcn bir kamu yarar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmamas\u0131 gerekir.<\/p>\n Kanun koyucu ve -kanunun verdi\u011fi yetkiye dayanarak- idari organlar, i\u015fveren kar\u015f\u0131s\u0131nda nispeten zay\u0131f konumda bulunan i\u015f\u00e7inin menfaatlerinin korunmas\u0131 amac\u0131yla birtak\u0131m emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmler sevk etmi\u015ftir. Bu ba\u011flamda 4857 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun’un 41. maddesinin yedinci f\u0131kras\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7inin r\u0131zas\u0131 bulunmadan fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 kesin olarak yasaklanm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Ayr\u0131ca \u00e7\u0131kar\u0131lan ikincil d\u00fczenlemelerle fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma onay\u0131n\u0131n her y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda ve yaz\u0131l\u0131 olarak al\u0131nmas\u0131 zorunlulu\u011fu getirilmi\u015ftir. Onay\u0131n her y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda al\u0131nma zorunlulu\u011fu \u00f6ng\u00f6ren mevzuat h\u00fckm\u00fc 25\/8\/2017 tarihine kadar y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte kalm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Buna g\u00f6re 25\/8\/2017 tarihinden \u00f6nceki mevzuat dikkate al\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131nda i\u015f\u00e7inin y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda onay\u0131 al\u0131nmadan fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131n\u0131n emredici kurallara ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil edece\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<\/p>\n Somut olayda ba\u015fvurucu, onay\u0131n her y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n zorunlu oldu\u011fu d\u00f6nemde -1\/4\/2008-29\/5\/2015 tarihleri aras\u0131nda- fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Dolay\u0131s\u0131yla an\u0131lan d\u00f6nemde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte bulunan mevzuata g\u00f6re ba\u015fvurucunun ilk y\u0131l d\u0131\u015f\u0131ndaki fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlere ayk\u0131r\u0131l\u0131k te\u015fkil etmi\u015ftir. Ba\u015fvurucunun \u00fccret talep etmeksizin fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmaya r\u0131za g\u00f6sterdi\u011fi kabul edilse bile bu r\u0131zan\u0131n emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlere ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmay\u0131 da kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u00f6ylenemez. Emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlere ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak fazladan \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lan ki\u015finin fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma \u00fccretinden feragat etmesi i\u015f\u00e7i menfaatlerinin korunmas\u0131ndaki \u00fcst\u00fcn kamusal yararla \u00e7eli\u015fmektedir.<\/p>\n B\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesi karar\u0131ndaki yakla\u015f\u0131m ba\u015fvurucunun fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131 d\u00f6nemde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fckte olan mevzuata g\u00f6re onay \u015fart\u0131n\u0131n bulundu\u011funu g\u00f6z ard\u0131 etmektedir. 25\/8\/2017 tarihinde y\u00fcr\u00fcrl\u00fc\u011fe giren mevzuat fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fma i\u00e7in i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesi imzalan\u0131rken verilen onay\u0131 yeterli g\u00f6rmekte ise de ge\u00e7mi\u015fte her y\u0131l\u0131n ba\u015f\u0131nda onay al\u0131nmadan ger\u00e7ekle\u015ftirilen fazla \u00e7al\u0131\u015fmalar\u0131 hukuki h\u00e2le getirmemektedir. B\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesinin bu yorumu \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi i\u015f hukukunun emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmaktan do\u011fan haklardan feragat edildi\u011finin kabul edilmesinin kamu yarar\u0131yla \u00e7eli\u015fti\u011fi ger\u00e7e\u011fini de hesaba katmamaktad\u0131r.<\/p>\n Sonu\u00e7 olarak b\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesinin ba\u015fvurucunun i\u015f s\u00f6zle\u015fmesindeki feragatinin mevzuat\u0131n emredici h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine ayk\u0131r\u0131 olarak \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131r\u0131lmas\u0131 kar\u015f\u0131l\u0131\u011f\u0131nda elde etti\u011fi haklar\u0131 da kapsad\u0131\u011f\u0131 yorumunun \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilir olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131 kanaatine var\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. B\u00f6lge adliye mahkemesinin a\u011f\u0131r hata te\u015fkil eden bu de\u011ferlendirmesi ba\u015fvurucunun \u00f6l\u00e7\u00fcs\u00fcz bir k\u00fclfete maruz b\u0131rak\u0131lmas\u0131na ve i\u015fveren ile i\u015f\u00e7inin menfaatleri aras\u0131nda ciddi bir dengesizli\u011fin olu\u015fmas\u0131na yol a\u00e7m\u0131\u015f, bu nedenle devletin Anayasa’n\u0131n 35. maddesinin \u00f6ng\u00f6rd\u00fc\u011f\u00fc pozitif y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fcl\u00fcklerin ihlal edilmesi sonucunu do\u011furmu\u015ftur.<\/p>\n