Sanığın duruşmada hazır bulunması kendisi açısından bir hak olduğu gibi aynı zamanda bir yükümlülüktür. Bu nedenle sanığın duruşmadan haberdar edilmesi ve duruşmaya katılmasının sağlanması gerektiği gibi kural olarak hazır bulunmayan sanık hakkında duruşma yapılabilmesi de mümkün değildir. Ancak CMK, bu kurala bazı istisnalar getirmiş ve bazı hallerde sanık hazır bulunmasa da duruşmanın yapılabilmesine olanak tanımıştır. Bu istisnalardan en geniş grubu oluşturan sanığın yokluğu hallerinde, mahkeme sanığa ulaşabilmesine ve onu duruşmada hazır edebilecek olmasına rağmen sanığın yokluğunda duruşma yapılmaktadır. Sanığın yokluğunda duruşmayı düzenleyen hükümler, bu yönüyle istisna hükümleri mahiyetinde olup adil yargılanma hakkı ve ceza muhakemesinin temel amaçları çerçevesinde yorumlanmalı ve uygulanmalıdır. Bu çalışmamızda da ilk derece yargılamasında sanığın yokluğu hallerine ilişkin CMK hükümleri, sanığın duruşmada hazır bulunma hakkı ve yükümlülüğü bağlamında incelenmektedir. Bu çerçevede sanığın duruşmada hazır bulunma hakkı ve yükümlülüğü, sanığın yokluğu kavramı, sanığın yokluğunda duruşma yapılmasına hakim olan ilkeler, sanığın yokluğunda duruşmanın yürütülmesi ve sanığın yokluğunda duruşma hükümlerine aykırılıkların hukuki sonuçları inceleme konusu yapılmıştır.
The fact that the accused is prepared for the trial is a right in his own sense as well as a duty. Therefore, it is not possible that the accused may be informed from the trial and that the participation in the trial should be guaranteed as well as that the accused may not be prosecuted as a rule. However, the CMK has brought some exceptions to this rule and in some cases the accused is not ready, although the trial is permitted. In cases of the absence of the accused, which constitutes the broadest group of these exceptions, the court can reach the accused and prepare him for trial, although the accused is absent, the trial is conducted. The provisions that regulate the trial in the absence of the defendant shall, in this regard, be subject to exceptional provisions and shall be interpreted and applied in the framework of the fundamental objectives of the right to fair trial and criminal trial. In this work, the CMK provisions concerning the absence of the accused in the first instance of trial are examined in the context of the right and obligation of the accused to be prepared for trial. In this context, the right and obligation of the defendant to be prepared for the trial, the concept of the defendant’s absence, the principles that dominate the trial in the absence of the defendant, the conduct of the trial in the absence of the defendant and the legal consequences of the violations of the judgment rulings in the absence of the defendant were examined.
To be present at the hearing is a right as well as an obligation for the accused. Therefore the accused should be informed of the hearing and ensured to attend the hearing and at the same time, it is not possible to hold a hearing about an accused who is not present as a rule. However, the law brought some exceptions to this rule and, in some cases, allowed the hearing to be held even if the accused was not present. In the absence of the accused, which constitutes the largest group of these exceptions, a hearing is held in the absence of the accused, although the court can reach the accused and make him appear at the hearing. The provisions regulating the hearing in the absence of the accused are in the nature of exemptional provisions and should be interpreted and implemented within the framework of the right to a fair trial and the basic objectives of criminal procedure. In this study, TCPC provisions related to the absence of the accused in the first instance trial are examined in the context of the accused's right and obligation to be present at the hearing. In this context, the right and obligation of the accused to be present at the hearing, the concept of the absence of the accused, the principles that dominate the hearing in the absence of the accused, the conduct of the hearing in the absence of the accused, and the legal consequences of the violations of the hearing provisions in the absence of the accused were subject to examination.
Alan : Hukuk
Dergi Türü : Ulusal
Benzer Makaleler | Yazar | # |
---|
Makale | Yazar | # |
---|