Publication: Soruşturma Aşamasının Sona Ermesi
Loading...
Date
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Abstract
Soruşturma aşaması, yetkili merciilerce suç şüphesinin öğrenilmesinden itibaren başlamakta ve Cumhuriyet Savcısı tarafından yürütülmektedir. Cumhuriyet Savcısı doğrudan veya emri altındaki kolluk görevlileri marifetiyle suça konu olaya ilişkin gerekli araştırmaları yapar. Cumhuriyet Savcısı, yapmış olduğu soruşturma sonucunda, suçun işlendiği hususunda yeterli şüphe oluşturacak delile ulaşmışsa şüpheli hakkında görevli ve yetkili mahkemeye hitaben şüphelinin cezalandırılması istemiyle iddianame tanzim eder. Hazırlanacak iddianamede bazı içerik ve şekil şartlarının bulunması gerekmektedir. İddianamenin yasada belirlenen usullere aykırı olarak düzenlenmesi halinde mahkeme tarafından, eksikliklerin tamamlanması için iddianame iade edilir. Eğer Cumhuriyet Savcısı yapmış soruşturma sonucunda suçun işlendiği hususunda yeterli şüphe oluşturan delile ulaşamamış ya da kovuşturma olanağının bulunmadığı bir hali tespit etmişse soruşturmaya konu olay ve şüpheli hakkında kovuşturmaya yer olmadığı kararı verir. Cumhuriyet Savcısı'nın soruşturma sonucunda vermiş olduğu karar; soruşturmanın tarafları, bazen de toplum için büyük önem arz etmektedir. Kararlar ile birlikte bir kimse suç şüphesi ile mahkeme önüne çıkabileceği gibi suça konu olaya ilişkin kovuşturmaya gerek görülmeyerek şüpheliye karşı kanuni takibat yapılmayabilir. Bu sebeple bu kararların isabetli ve yasaya uygun şekilde verilmesi büyük önem arz etmektedir. Soruşturma aşamasının sona ermesi hallerine ilişkin mevzuatta bir kısım eksiklikler bulunmaktadır. Yine mevzuattaki bazı hükümlerin uygulanması aşamasında tereddütler yaşanmaktadır. Özellikle hukuk sistemimize daha sonradan giren ancak uygulaması tam olarak yerleşmeyen iddianamenin iadesi gibi müesseselerde bu duruma özelikle rastlanmaktadır. Yapılan çalışma ile bu sorunlar tespit edilerek sorunların çözümüne çalışılmış, bu sayede mevzuatın somut olaya isabetli şekilde tatbikinin sağlanması hedeflenmiştir. Ayrıca çalışmamız ile soruşturma aşamasının sona ermesine ilişkin; uygulamaya ilişkin hususları da barındıran, kapsamlı ve başvuru niteliğinde bir eser ortaya konulması amaçlanmıştır. Anahtar Sözcükler: Soruşturma, Kovuşturma, İddianame, Delil
The investigation phase is commenced by the detection of a case, which gives the impression that a crime was committed by competent authorities, and conducted by the Public Prosecutor. Public Prosecutor, via law enforcement officers under his/her authority, carries out the necessary researches regarding the criminal case. If he/she reaches proof, which constitutes adequate suspicion on the fact that the crime was committed, as a result of the investigation he/she carries out; he/she files a public lawsuit by issuing a bill of indictment about the suspect for the authorized and competent court. There are specific contents and methods of the bill of indictment issued. In case the bill of indictment is issued in defiance of the procedures determined in the law, the bill of indictment is returned by the court for the completion of the deficient part. In case the Public Prosecutor can not reach the proof, which constitutes sufficient suspicion regarding the commitment of the crime, as a result of the investigation he/she carries out, or determines a case that there is no possibility for the proceeding, he/she decides that there is no need for carrying out a proceeding of the criminal case and the suspect. The decision given by the Public Prosecutor as a result of the investigation constitutes a great significance for the parties of the investigation, and sometimes for the society. With these decisions, a person may appear in the court with the suspicion of crime and no legal proceeding can be implemented against the suspect by considering that proceeding regarding the criminal case is not necessary. Accordingly, giving these decisions accurately and in compliance with the law constitutes great significance. There are some deficiencies in the legislation regarding the cases of end of the investigation phase. Hesitations are also encountered during the phase of implementation of some provisions in the legislation. This case is particularly encountered in cases such as return of the bill of indictment, which is subsequently included in our legal system but the implementation of which has not been exactly placed. These problems were attempted to be determined and solved with this study, and accordingly, accurate execution of the legislation on the case was aimed. Furthermore; through our study, it was aimed to provide a consistent work, which includes the issues regarding the implementation related with the end of the investigation phase, and which has the quality of application. Key Words: Investigation, Proceeding, Bill of Indictment, Proof
The investigation phase is commenced by the detection of a case, which gives the impression that a crime was committed by competent authorities, and conducted by the Public Prosecutor. Public Prosecutor, via law enforcement officers under his/her authority, carries out the necessary researches regarding the criminal case. If he/she reaches proof, which constitutes adequate suspicion on the fact that the crime was committed, as a result of the investigation he/she carries out; he/she files a public lawsuit by issuing a bill of indictment about the suspect for the authorized and competent court. There are specific contents and methods of the bill of indictment issued. In case the bill of indictment is issued in defiance of the procedures determined in the law, the bill of indictment is returned by the court for the completion of the deficient part. In case the Public Prosecutor can not reach the proof, which constitutes sufficient suspicion regarding the commitment of the crime, as a result of the investigation he/she carries out, or determines a case that there is no possibility for the proceeding, he/she decides that there is no need for carrying out a proceeding of the criminal case and the suspect. The decision given by the Public Prosecutor as a result of the investigation constitutes a great significance for the parties of the investigation, and sometimes for the society. With these decisions, a person may appear in the court with the suspicion of crime and no legal proceeding can be implemented against the suspect by considering that proceeding regarding the criminal case is not necessary. Accordingly, giving these decisions accurately and in compliance with the law constitutes great significance. There are some deficiencies in the legislation regarding the cases of end of the investigation phase. Hesitations are also encountered during the phase of implementation of some provisions in the legislation. This case is particularly encountered in cases such as return of the bill of indictment, which is subsequently included in our legal system but the implementation of which has not been exactly placed. These problems were attempted to be determined and solved with this study, and accordingly, accurate execution of the legislation on the case was aimed. Furthermore; through our study, it was aimed to provide a consistent work, which includes the issues regarding the implementation related with the end of the investigation phase, and which has the quality of application. Key Words: Investigation, Proceeding, Bill of Indictment, Proof
Description
Tez (yüksek lisans) -- Ondokuz Mayıs Üniversitesi, 2014
Libra Kayıt No: 110663
Libra Kayıt No: 110663
Keywords
Citation
WoS Q
Scopus Q
Source
Volume
Issue
Start Page
End Page
123
