CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 4 mars 2014

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sA5C4F8A9 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s908347EA { width:175.61pt; display:inline-block } .s8EFC8F8 { width:32.36pt; display:inline-block } .s5A070004 { width:213.96pt; display:inline-block }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 25205/11 Kibar YARAN against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 4   March 2014 as a Committee composed of:   Nebojša Vučinić, President,   Paul Lemmens,   Robert Spano, judges, and Stanley Naismith, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 March 2011, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Ms Kibar Yaran, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1953 and lives in Van. She was represented before the Court by Mr   D.   Aslan, a lawyer practising in Van. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The applicant complained under Articles 2 and 6 of the Convention that her son had fallen into depression while performing his military service and that the military authorities had neither taken any measures to treat him or to prevent his suicide nor conducted an effective investigation into the liability of Turkish State Railways or the military authorities regarding her son’s death. The applicant’s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit observations on her behalf. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 30 October 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 19 August 2013 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 26 November 2013. However, no response has been received. THE LAW The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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.   Stanley Naismith   Nebojša Vučinić   Registrar   President