88 Türk Anayasa Yargısında Sözün Bittiği Yer: Karar Verilmesine Yer Olmadığı (KVYO) Kararı Anahtar Kelimeler: Karar Verilmesine Yer Olmadığı, KVYO, Anayasa Mahkemesi, Anayasa Yargısı, Anayasa Mahkemesi Kararı Abstract: Constitutional Courts speak through their decisions. Hence, their decisions become the very words of the courts. Like its counterparts, the established decisions of the Turkish Constitutional Court become their words. Thus, the decision of “no ground for a ruling” (NGR) can be described as “the point where words fail”. Indeed, when this decision is reached, no actual substantive ruling is rendered on the request; that is to say, further words are no longer needed. In recent years, Turkish constitutional law scholars have been compelled to discuss a wide range of constitutional violations. Undoubtedly, one of the most striking instances of this phenomenon has been the recent judicial proceedings concerning Hatay MP Can Atalay. In the end, this process culminated in the loss of parliamentary membership, an act which the Constitutional Court deemed “null and void”, leading to the conclusion with a decision of “no ground for a ruling”, as if to signify the point where words fail. In this context, it was considered beneficial to examine the NGR decisions, which have not attracted much attention in our literature. Throughout the study, the formation, development, and the diversifying types of NGR decisions over time were analyzed. Additionally, it concentrated on identifying the legal issues arising from the nature of this decision type and developing solutions to address them. Thus, the study concluded with the realization that even the seemingly insignificant details in law, particularly in constitutional law, can be of great importance, and every subject must be thoroughly researched down to its finest details. Keywords: No Ground for a Ruling, NGR, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Jurisprudence,Decision of the Constitutional Court GİRİŞ “Karar verilmesine yer olmadığı” (KVYO) kararları, özünde bir yargılama usulü konusudur. Söz konusu karar türü hem medeni hem idari yargılama hukukumuzda geniş bir uygulama alanına sahiptir. Nitekim medeni yargılama hukukunda, davanın konusuz kalması halinde esas (dava) hakkında karar verilmesine yer olmadığına karar verileceği 6100 sayılı Kanun’da açıkça düzenlenmiştir (HMK, m. 331/1).1 2577 sayılı İdari Yargılama Usulü Kanunu’nda ise bu konuda açık bir 1 Medeni yargılama hukukunda KVYO kararlarına yönelik ayrıntılı bilgi için bkz.: Baki Kuru, Hukuk Muhakemeleri Usulü, İstanbul: Demir ve Demir Müşavirlik ve Yayıncılık, 6. Baskı, C. III, 2001, s. 3015 vd.; Melih Işık, Medeni Yargılama Hukukunda Davanın Konusuz Kalması, Yayımlanmamış Doktora Tezi, Antalya: Akdeniz Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, 2024, s. 380 vd.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTQ3OTE1