SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 74308/01
by Taner TANYERİ and Others
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 6 December 2005 as a Chamber composed of:
MrJ.-P. Costa, President,
MrA.B. Baka,
MrR. Türmen,
MrK. Jungwiert,
MrM. Ugrekhelidze,
MrsA. Mularoni,
MrsE. Fura-Sandström, judges,
and Mr S. Naismith, Section Deputy Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 August 2001,
Having regard to the interim measure indicated to the applicants under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Taner Tanyeri, Mr Erkan Yirdem, Mr Ayhan Mimtaş, Ms Gülten Tanyeri, Ms Kıyas Yirdem and Mr Selime Mimtaş, are Turkish nationals. Ms Gülten Tanyeri, Ms Kıyas Yirdem and Mr Selime Mimtaş are the parents of the first three applicants, who were detained in the Tekirdağ and Kandıra F‑type prisons at the time of the application to the Court. The applicants were represented before the Court by A.-L. Sicilianos and C.J. Mavroidis, lawyers attached to the Marangopoulos Foundation for Human Rights in Athens.
The facts of the case may be summarised as follows.
On 11 May, 3 June and 11 May 2001 Taner Tanyeri, Erkan Yirdem and Ayhan Mimtaş started a hunger strike in protest against their solitary confinement in F-type prison cells.
On 27 August 2001 the applicants applied to the Court for an interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and requested the Court to order that the detention of the three prisoners in F-type prison cells cease. On 27 September 2001 the President of the Chamber, notified the Government of the respondent Party of the introduction of the application under Rule 40 of the Rules of Court. He also invited the applicants, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, to discontinue their hunger strike.
By a letter dated 20 May 2002, the applicants’ representative informed the Court that Taner Tanyeri, Erkan Yirdem and Ayhan Mimtaş had suspended their hunger strike and that they had been released from detention.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants originally complained, under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, about the solitary confinement of Taner Tanyeri, Erkan Yirdem and Ayhan Mimtaş in F-type prison cells. They further complained, under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention, that the proceedings brought against Taner Tanyeri and Erkan Yirdem were not concluded within a reasonable time. They finally complained, under Article 5 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention, that the length of the detention on remand of Taner Tanyeri and Erkan Yirdem was excessive and that there was no effective remedy in domestic law to challenge the lawfulness of that detention.
THE LAW
By a letter dated 8 June 2005, the applicants were requested to submit the documents relevant to their complaints under Articles 6 § 1 and 5 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention by 7 July 2005.
On 12 October 2005 one of the applicants’ representatives notified the Court that he would not be able to submit the documents requested by the Court as he had not received any of these documents from the applicants. He further informed the Court that the applicants did not wish to pursue the case.
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court notes that the applicants do not intend to pursue the application. 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 further examination of the case. Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the application and it should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
S. Naismith J.-P. Costa
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy