SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 42744/09
Haydar TİKİZ
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 10 January 2017 as a Committee composed of:
Paul Lemmens, President,
Ksenija Turković,
Jon Fridrik Kjølbro, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 1 April 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Haydar Tikiz, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1969 and is detained in Tekirdağ prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr İbrahim Tikiz, a lawyer practising in Iğdır.
The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
The case concerned, in particular, the alleged lack of social and cultural activities in Erzurum H-Type Prison where the applicant was being detained at the time of the introduction of the application before the Court.
The applicant’s complaints under Articles 3, 6 and 8 of the Convention were communicated to the respondent Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 22 April 2016, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 27 January 2016 and that no extension of time had been requested. 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. The applicant’s representative received this letter on 3 May 2016. However, no response has been received.
On 29 June 2016 a similarly worded letter was sent by registered post to the applicant himself. The applicant received this letter on 13 July 2016. No response has been received from the applicant either.
THE LAW
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.
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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 2 February 2017.
Hasan BakırcıPaul Lemmens
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy