SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 65802/10
Medeni KİYE
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 19 November 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
András Sajó,
Nebojša Vučinić, judges,
and Seçkin Erel, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 13 October 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Mr Medeni Kiye, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1983 and lives in Izmir. He was represented before the Court by Mr A. Güzel, a lawyer practising in Ağrı.
2. The applicant mainly alleged that he had been subjected to ill‑treatment during his nine-day police custody in 2006. He claimed, in particular, that he had been stripped naked, dragged along the ground and threatened with death and that he had not been taken for a medical examination before he was placed in custody. He also maintained that he had not been informed of the reasons for his arrest and had not been brought before a judge promptly. Finally, he complained about the outcome of the criminal proceedings against him. The applicant relied on Articles 1, 2, 3, 5, 6 and 14 of the Convention.
3. By a letter dated 21 December 2011, the applicant’s representative was requested to submit the documents substantiating the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment and the copies of the judgments delivered as a result of the criminal proceedings against the applicant. No response was received.
4. On 11 July 2013 another letter was sent to the applicant’s representative, this time by registered post, requesting him to submit the required documents by 19 September 2013. The applicant’s representative’s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application.
5. According to the information obtained from the official website of the Turkish Postal Service, the applicant’s representative received that letter on 29 July 2013. However, no response has been received.
THE LAW
6. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 in fine, the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the continued examination of the case.
7. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Seçkin ErelPeer Lorenzen
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy