2 Sanık Sandalyesinde Gazeteciler: Anayasa Mahkemesi Kararlarının Gazetecilere Uygulanan ... Abstract: Freedom of press, as a specific reflection of freedom of expression, is an intersection of society’s right to receive information and media’s freedom to impart information. Journalists have a key role in freedom of press due to their function as an intermediary. In this respect, interference with the right to liberty and security of the journalists through measures and punishments, entails a direct intervention of media’s right to impart information, of society’s right to receive information and to the democratic deliberation platforms. Considering the degree of impact of measures limiting the right to liberty and security of journalists, the examination of the compliance of Constitutional Court decisions regarding the conditions, structure and the content of the detention decisions to constitutional, regional and international human rights documents would reflect the efficacy of plurality, tolerance and broadmindedness in the public deliberation platform. Within the scope of this research, Constitutional Court decisions delivered until August 31, 2021 regarding right to liberty and security of journalists are examined. The extent of realisation of the constitutional guarantees and the protection afforded by the European Convention on Human Rights is discussed, and, the differentiation in the interpretation of the similar norms by the European Court of Human Rights and the Constitutional Court is elaborated. Keywords: Right to Liberty and Security, Journalists, Detention, Individual Application, Turkish Constitutional Court, European Court of Human Rights Giriş Demokratik toplumlarda gazetecilik faaliyeti ve basın özgürlüğü hem bilgi alma hem de bilgi verme özgürlüğünü kapsamaktadır. Bu bağlamda basın özgürlüğünün temelinde yatan ifade özgürlüğü, demokratik toplumların olmazsa olmazlarındandır. Zira demokratik toplumlar, yapısı itibariyle çoğulcu, açık fikirlilik ve hoşgörü üzerine kuruludur1 ve basının yansıttığı farklı düşünce ve ifadeler kamusal tartışma ortamına büyük katkı sağlamaktadır.2 Basının ifade özgürlüğü, toplumdaki çoğunluk ya da azınlık görüşlerini yansıtabilir; ancak önemli olan nokta, farklı görüşlerin kamusal ortamlarda yer almasının 1 Handyside v United Kingdom (1979-80) 1 EHRR 737, §49. Demokrasi ile ifade özgürlüğü arasındaki ilişkiye dair ayrıca bkz. Şeyla Benhabib, “Toward a Deliberative Model of Democratic Legitimacy”, Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, Princeton University Press, Princeton 1999, s. 67-94; Alain Touraine, What is Democracy?, Westview Press, 1997; Robert Alan Dahl, Dilemmas of Pluralist Democracy: Autonomy vs. Control, Yale University Press, New Haven 1982; Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of Public Sphere, Polity Press, 1989. 2 Observer and Guardian v United Kingdom (1992) 14 EHRR 153, §59.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1