{"id":961,"date":"2020-06-08T17:00:49","date_gmt":"2020-06-08T14:00:49","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/hukuk.name\/?p=961"},"modified":"2023-06-01T14:06:40","modified_gmt":"2023-06-01T14:06:40","slug":"isleteni-veya-sahibi-devlet-olan-araclarin-sebebiyet-verdigi-zararlarda-gorevli-mahkeme","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/2020\/06\/08\/isleteni-veya-sahibi-devlet-olan-araclarin-sebebiyet-verdigi-zararlarda-gorevli-mahkeme\/","title":{"rendered":"\u0130\u015fleteni veya sahibi Devlet olan ara\u00e7lar\u0131n sebebiyet verdi\u011fi zararlarda G\u00f6revli Mahkeme"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Yarg\u0131tay 4. Hukuk Dairesi &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2019\/2909 E. &nbsp;, &nbsp;2019\/6324 K.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li>Somut olayda; &#8230;. ara\u00e7 s\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fcn\u00fcn yol \u00fczerinde bulunan \u00e7ukurdan ka\u00e7maya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131rada meydana geldi\u011fi, daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019n\u00fcn trafik g\u00fcvenli\u011fini ilgilendiren konularda gerekli \u00f6nlem ve tedbiri almamas\u0131 nedeniyle sorumlu oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<\/li>\n\n\n\n<li>\u015eu durumda, &#8230;. daval\u0131 idare y\u00f6n\u00fcnden i\u015fin esas\u0131na girilerek ula\u015f\u0131lacak sonuca g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken yarg\u0131 yolu nedeniyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 usul ve yasaya uygun de\u011fildir.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>&#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221;<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">MAHKEMES\u0130 : &#8230; B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi &#8230; Hukuk Dairesi<br>\u0130LK DERECE<br>MAHKEMES\u0130 : &#8230; Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi<br><br>Davac\u0131lar &#8230; ve di\u011ferleri vekili Avukat &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan, daval\u0131 &#8230; aleyhine 11\/07\/2017 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde verilen dilek\u00e7e ile \u00f6l\u00fcml\u00fc trafik kazas\u0131 nedeniyle maddi ve manevi tazminat istenmesi \u00fczerine mahkemece yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama sonunda; yarg\u0131 yolu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan g\u00f6revsizlik nedeniyle davan\u0131n usulden reddine dair verilen 24\/04\/2018 g\u00fcnl\u00fc karara kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131lar vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusu \u00fczerine yap\u0131lan incelemede; istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 353\/1-b.1 maddesi gere\u011fince esastan reddine dair verilen 04\/07\/2019 g\u00fcnl\u00fc karar\u0131n Yarg\u0131tayca incelenmesi davac\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan s\u00fcresi i\u00e7inde istenilmekle temyiz dilek\u00e7esinin kabul\u00fcne karar verildikten sonra tetkik hakimi taraf\u0131ndan haz\u0131rlanan rapor ile dosya i\u00e7erisindeki ka\u011f\u0131tlar incelenerek gere\u011fi g\u00f6r\u00fc\u015f\u00fcld\u00fc.<br>Dava, \u00f6l\u00fcml\u00fc trafik kazas\u0131 nedeni ile maddi ve manevi tazminat istemine ili\u015fkindir. Mahkemece davan\u0131n yarg\u0131 yolu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan g\u00f6revsizlik nedeni ile usulden reddine karar verilmi\u015f; h\u00fck\u00fcm, davac\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan temyiz edilmi\u015ftir.<br>Davac\u0131lar vekili; 22\/06\/2017 tarihinde s\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fc &#8230;\u2019nin sevk ve idaresinde bulunan arac\u0131n neden oldu\u011fu kazada, ara\u00e7ta yolcu olarak bulunan davac\u0131lar\u0131n deste\u011fi &#8230;\u2019n\u00fcn vefat etti\u011fini, davac\u0131lar\u0131n &#8230;\u2019n\u00fcn anne, baba ve karde\u015fleri oldu\u011funu belirterek maddi ve manevi tazminat isteminde bulunmu\u015ftur.<br>Daval\u0131 &#8230; vekili; davan\u0131n hizmet kusuruna dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 ve idari yarg\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6rev alan\u0131na girdi\u011fini belirterek davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmesi gerekti\u011fini savunmu\u015ftur.<br>\u0130lk Derece Mahkemesince; daval\u0131 &#8230; ve di\u011fer daval\u0131lar\u0131n sorumluluklar\u0131n\u0131n farkl\u0131 hukuki sebeplere dayand\u0131\u011f\u0131, davan\u0131n &#8230; y\u00f6n\u00fcnden 6100 Say\u0131l\u0131 Hukuk Muhakemeleri Kanunu\u2019nun (HMK) 167. maddesi uyar\u0131nca ayr\u0131lmas\u0131na karar verildi\u011fi, kamu hizmeti g\u00f6rmekle y\u00fck\u00fcml\u00fc olan &#8230;&#8217;n\u00fcn, kamu hizmeti s\u0131ras\u0131nda meydana gelen zararlardan dolay\u0131 \u00f6zel hukuk h\u00fck\u00fcmlerine tabi olmad\u0131\u011f\u0131, hizmet kusurundan dolay\u0131 a\u00e7\u0131lan davalar\u0131n \u0130dari Yarg\u0131lama Usul\u00fc Hakk\u0131ndaki Kanun&#8217;un 2. maddesi uyar\u0131nca tam yarg\u0131 davas\u0131 olarak ikame edilmesi gerekti\u011fi gerek\u00e7esiyle daval\u0131 &#8230; hakk\u0131nda a\u00e7\u0131lan davada dava dilek\u00e7esinin yarg\u0131 yolu bak\u0131m\u0131ndan g\u00f6revsizlik nedeniyle HMK 115\/2. maddesi gere\u011fince dava \u015fart\u0131 yoklu\u011fundan usulden reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir.<br>H\u00fckme kar\u015f\u0131 davac\u0131lar vekili taraf\u0131ndan istinaf kanun yoluna ba\u015fvuru yap\u0131lm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r.<br>B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesince; davaya konu olay\u0131n idarenin hizmet kusurundan kaynakland\u0131\u011f\u0131 bu itibarla ilk derece mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n yerinde oldu\u011fu gerek\u00e7esiyle davac\u0131lar vekilinin istinaf ba\u015fvurusunun HMK&#8217;n\u0131n 353\/1-b-1 maddesi uyar\u0131nca esastan reddine karar verilmi\u015ftir. Karar\u0131 davac\u0131lar vekili temyiz etmi\u015ftir.<br>Dava konusu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k; 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Karayollar\u0131 Trafik Kanunu kapsam\u0131nda, trafik kazas\u0131 sonucu \u00f6l\u00fcm nedeniyle davac\u0131lar\u0131n&nbsp;<mark>destekten<\/mark>&nbsp;<mark>yoksun<\/mark>&nbsp;<mark>kalma<\/mark>&nbsp;ve 6098 say\u0131l\u0131 T\u00fcrk Bor\u00e7lar Kanunu\u2019nun 56\/2 h\u00fckm\u00fc uyar\u0131nca manevi tazminat istemlerine ili\u015fkindir. Somut uyu\u015fmazl\u0131kta \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi gereken, davan\u0131n hangi yarg\u0131 kolunda g\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi meselesidir.<br>2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Karayollar\u0131 Trafik Kanunu&#8217;nun birinci maddesinde, bu Kanun\u2019un amac\u0131n\u0131n, karayollar\u0131nda, can ve mal g\u00fcvenli\u011fi y\u00f6n\u00fcnden trafik d\u00fczenini sa\u011flamak ve trafik g\u00fcvenli\u011fini ilgilendiren t\u00fcm konularda al\u0131nacak \u00f6nlemleri belirlemek oldu\u011fu belirtilmi\u015ftir.<br><strong>\u00d6te yandan, 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;un 6099 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 14. maddesiyle de\u011fi\u015ftirilen 110. maddesi ise \u201c\u0130\u015fleteni veya sahibi Devlet ve di\u011fer kamu kurulu\u015flar\u0131 olan ara\u00e7lar\u0131n sebebiyet verdi\u011fi zararlara ili\u015fkin olanlar\u0131 d\u00e2hil, bu Kanundan do\u011fan sorumluluk davalar\u0131, adli yarg\u0131da g\u00f6r\u00fcl\u00fcr. Zarar g\u00f6renin kamu g\u00f6revlisi olmas\u0131, bu f\u0131kra h\u00fckm\u00fcn\u00fcn uygulanmas\u0131n\u0131 \u00f6nlemez. Hemzemin ge\u00e7itte meydana gelen tren-trafik kazalar\u0131nda da bu Kanun h\u00fck\u00fcmleri uygulan\u0131r.\u201d \u015feklindedir.<\/strong><br>Yasama belgeleri ile an\u0131lan d\u00fczenlemenin gerek\u00e7esine bak\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131nda, 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un uygulanmas\u0131 gereken sorumluluk davalar\u0131nda bir karma\u015fan\u0131n s\u00f6z konusu oldu\u011fu, bu karma\u015fan\u0131n adli yarg\u0131 yerlerinin g\u00f6revli oldu\u011fu belirlenmek suretiyle giderilmek istendi\u011fi anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<br>Bahse konu d\u00fczenleme, Anayasa\u2019ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 oldu\u011fu iddias\u0131 ile somut norm denetimi yoluyla Anayasa Mahkemesi (AYM) \u00f6n\u00fcne ta\u015f\u0131nm\u0131\u015f, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 2, 125 ve 155. maddeleri ba\u011flam\u0131nda inceleme yapan Mahkeme, d\u00fczenlemeyi Anayasa\u2019ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulmayarak iptal istemini \u015fu gerek\u00e7elerle reddetmi\u015ftir. (AYM\u2019nin 26\/12\/2013 tarihli ve 2013\/68-165 E-K say\u0131l\u0131 karar\u0131): \u201cAnayasa Mahkemesinin daha \u00f6nceki kimi kararlar\u0131nda da belirtildi\u011fi \u00fczere, tarihsel geli\u015fime paralel olarak Anayasa&#8217;da adli ve idari yarg\u0131 ayr\u0131m\u0131na gidilmi\u015f ve idari uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde idare ve vergi mahkemeleriyle Dan\u0131\u015ftay yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. Bu nedenle, genel olarak idare hukuku alan\u0131na giren konularda idari yarg\u0131, \u00f6zel hukuk alan\u0131na giren konularda adli yarg\u0131 g\u00f6revli olacakt\u0131r. Bu durumda, idari yarg\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6rev alan\u0131na giren bir uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fcnde adli yarg\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6revlendirilmesi konusunda kanun koyucunun mutlak bir takdir yetkisinin bulundu\u011funu s\u00f6ylemek olanakl\u0131 de\u011fildir. Ancak, idari yarg\u0131n\u0131n denetimine ba\u011fl\u0131 olmas\u0131 gereken idari bir uyu\u015fmazl\u0131\u011f\u0131n \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm\u00fc, hakl\u0131 neden ve kamu yarar\u0131n\u0131n bulunmas\u0131 h\u00e2linde kanun koyucu taraf\u0131ndan adli yarg\u0131ya b\u0131rak\u0131labilir.<br>\u0130tiraz konusu kural, trafik kazas\u0131nda zarar g\u00f6renin asker ki\u015fi ya da memur olmas\u0131na, arac\u0131n askeri hizmete ili\u015fkin olmas\u0131na, kamu ya da \u00f6zel ara\u00e7 olmas\u0131na veya olay\u0131n hemzemin ge\u00e7itte meydana gelmesi durumlar\u0131na g\u00f6re farkl\u0131 yarg\u0131 kollar\u0131nda g\u00f6r\u00fclmekte olan 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;dan kaynaklanan t\u00fcm sorumluluk davalar\u0131n\u0131n adli yarg\u0131da g\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fini \u00f6ng\u00f6rmektedir. \u0130tiraz konusu d\u00fczenlemenin gerek\u00e7esinde de ifade edildi\u011fi gibi, askeri idari yarg\u0131, idari yarg\u0131 veya adli yarg\u0131 kollar\u0131 aras\u0131nda uygulamada var olan yarg\u0131 yolu belirsizli\u011fi giderilerek, s\u00f6z konusu davalarla ilgili olarak yeknesak bir usul belirlenmektedir. Ayn\u0131 t\u00fcr davalar\u0131n ayn\u0131 yarg\u0131 yolunda \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesi sa\u011flanarak davalar\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fclmesi ve \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcmlenmesinin h\u0131zland\u0131r\u0131ld\u0131\u011f\u0131, bu suretle k\u0131sa s\u00fcrede sonu\u00e7 al\u0131nmas\u0131n\u0131n olanakl\u0131 k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131 ve bunun s\u00f6z konusu davalar\u0131n adli yarg\u0131da g\u00f6r\u00fclece\u011fi yolunda getirilen d\u00fczenlemenin kamu yarar\u0131na y\u00f6nelik oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.\u201d.<br>\u00d6te yandan, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 158. maddesi uyar\u0131nca adli ve idari yarg\u0131 mercileri aras\u0131ndaki g\u00f6rev ve h\u00fck\u00fcm uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131n\u0131 kesin olarak \u00e7\u00f6zmeye yetkili k\u0131l\u0131nan Uyu\u015fmazl\u0131k Mahkemesi (UYM) de \u00f6n\u00fcne gelen benzer uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klarda AYM\u2019nin yukar\u0131da yer verilen karar\u0131na at\u0131f yaparak benzer sonuca ula\u015fm\u0131\u015ft\u0131r. UYM, 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 110. maddesiyle, yarg\u0131 yolu uyu\u015fmazl\u0131klar\u0131na ve bu nedenle de yarg\u0131lamalar\u0131n uzamas\u0131na neden olan an\u0131lan Kanun&#8217;dan kaynaklanan t\u00fcm sorumluluk davalar\u0131nda, yeknesakl\u0131\u011f\u0131 sa\u011flamak amac\u0131yla ve kamu yarar\u0131 g\u00f6zetilerek adli yarg\u0131 yerlerinin g\u00f6revli k\u0131l\u0131nd\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131, AYM\u2019nin de bu durumu Anayasa\u2019ya ayk\u0131r\u0131 bulmad\u0131\u011f\u0131n\u0131 tespit etmektedir (UYM\u2019nin 11\/04\/2016 tarihli ve 2016\/163-210 E-K say\u0131l\u0131; 24\/09\/2018 tarihli ve 2018\/530-467 E-K say\u0131l\u0131 kararlar\u0131).<br>2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 110. maddesinin gerek\u00e7esiyle AYM ve UYM\u2019nin yukar\u0131da yer verilen kararlar\u0131 birlikte de\u011ferlendirildi\u011finde, 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun&#8217;dan kaynaklanan t\u00fcm sorumluluk davalar\u0131n\u0131n adli yarg\u0131da g\u00f6r\u00fclmesi gereklili\u011fi ortaya \u00e7\u0131km\u0131\u015f, Anayasa\u2019n\u0131n 153. maddesinin birinci ve son f\u0131kralar\u0131 ile 158. maddesinin birinci f\u0131kras\u0131 uyar\u0131nca da t\u00fcm yarg\u0131 yerlerinin benzer nitelikte yorum yapmas\u0131 ka\u00e7\u0131n\u0131lmaz h\u00e2le gelmi\u015ftir.<br>Hemen belirtilmelidir ki benzer olaylara ayn\u0131 hukuki sonu\u00e7lar ba\u011flanmas\u0131 anlam\u0131na gelen yarg\u0131sal kararlardaki istikrar, adil yarg\u0131lanma hakk\u0131n\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcn\u00fcmlerinden olan hakkaniyete uygun yarg\u0131lama ilkesinin gere\u011fidir. \u0130stikrarl\u0131 karar verme, hukuki belirlili\u011fi ve \u00f6ng\u00f6r\u00fclebilirli\u011fi sa\u011flad\u0131\u011f\u0131 gibi, ki\u015filerin yarg\u0131 sistemine ve mahkeme kararlar\u0131na g\u00fcvenini de tesis eder. 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun\u2019un 110. maddesinin uygulanmas\u0131nda, Dairemizin idari yarg\u0131 yerlerini g\u00f6revli kabul eden kararlar\u0131 (11\/03\/2013 tarihli ve 2013\/1438-4361 E-K say\u0131l\u0131; 18\/04\/2013 tarihli ve 2013\/6055-7371 E-K say\u0131l\u0131; 06\/11\/2013 tarihli ve 2013\/15737-17128 E-K say\u0131l\u0131; 06\/03\/2013 tarihli ve 2013\/258-3916 E-K say\u0131l\u0131) bulunmakta ise de yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan gerek\u00e7e ve y\u00fcksek mahkeme kararlar\u0131 g\u00f6z \u00f6n\u00fcne al\u0131narak Dairemizin 04\/12\/2019 tarihli ve 2019\/2897-5764 E-K say\u0131l\u0131 ilke karar\u0131yla \u00f6nceki yerle\u015fik uygulamadan d\u00f6n\u00fclm\u00fc\u015ft\u00fcr.<br><strong>Somut olayda; davan\u0131n 2918 say\u0131l\u0131 Kanun kapsam\u0131nda tazminat istemine ili\u015fkin oldu\u011fu, 22\/06\/2017 tarihinde dava konusu kazan\u0131n, ara\u00e7 s\u00fcr\u00fcc\u00fcs\u00fcn\u00fcn yol \u00fczerinde bulunan \u00e7ukurdan ka\u00e7maya \u00e7al\u0131\u015ft\u0131\u011f\u0131 s\u0131rada meydana geldi\u011fi, daval\u0131 &#8230;\u2019n\u00fcn trafik g\u00fcvenli\u011fini ilgilendiren konularda gerekli \u00f6nlem ve tedbiri almamas\u0131 nedeniyle sorumlu oldu\u011fu anla\u015f\u0131lmaktad\u0131r.<br>\u015eu durumda, yukar\u0131da yap\u0131lan a\u00e7\u0131klamalar do\u011frultusunda eldeki davan\u0131n g\u00f6r\u00fcm ve \u00e7\u00f6z\u00fcm yeri adli yarg\u0131d\u0131r. Mahkemece, daval\u0131 idare y\u00f6n\u00fcnden i\u015fin esas\u0131na girilerek ula\u015f\u0131lacak sonuca g\u00f6re bir karar verilmesi gerekirken yarg\u0131 yolu nedeniyle davan\u0131n reddine karar verilmi\u015f olmas\u0131 usul ve yasaya uygun de\u011fildir. A\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131 kald\u0131r\u0131larak \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n bozulmas\u0131 gerekmi\u015ftir.<\/strong><br>SONU\u00c7: Yukar\u0131da a\u00e7\u0131klanan nedenlerle temyiz olunan B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n HMK 373\/1. maddesi gere\u011fince KALDIRILMASINA ve \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesi karar\u0131n\u0131n HMK 371. maddesi uyar\u0131nca BOZULMASINA dosyan\u0131n \u0130lk Derece Mahkemesine, karar\u0131n bir \u00f6rne\u011finin de B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesine G\u00d6NDER\u0130LMES\u0130NE ve pe\u015fin al\u0131nan harc\u0131n istek halinde geri verilmesine 26\/12\/2019 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde oy birli\u011fiyle karar verildi.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Yarg\u0131tay 4. Hukuk Dairesi &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;2019\/2909 E. &nbsp;, &nbsp;2019\/6324 K. &#8220;\u0130\u00e7tihat Metni&#8221; MAHKEMES\u0130 : &#8230; B\u00f6lge Adliye Mahkemesi &#8230; Hukuk Dairesi\u0130LK DERECEMAHKEMES\u0130 : &#8230; Asliye Hukuk Mahkemesi Davac\u0131lar &#8230; ve di\u011ferleri vekili Avukat &#8230; taraf\u0131ndan, daval\u0131 &#8230; aleyhine 11\/07\/2017 g\u00fcn\u00fcnde verilen dilek\u00e7e ile \u00f6l\u00fcml\u00fc trafik kazas\u0131 nedeniyle maddi ve manevi tazminat istenmesi \u00fczerine mahkemece yap\u0131lan yarg\u0131lama [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1924,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[17,23],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-961","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-maddi-manevi-tazminat","category-trafik-kazasi-tazminatlari"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/961","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=961"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/961\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2039,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/961\/revisions\/2039"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1924"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=961"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=961"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/hukuk.name\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=961"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}