CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 mars 2017

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s5362FFEB { width:4.87pt; display:inline-block } .sD79BB263 { width:196.1pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 65472/11 Deniz YILDIZ against Turkey The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 14   March 2017 as a Committee composed of:   Ksenija Turković, President,   Jon Fridrik Kjølbro,   Georges Ravarani, judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 September 2011, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Ms Deniz Yıldız, is a Turkish national, who was born in 1981, and is detained in Sincan. She was represented before the Court by Ms S. Coşkun, a lawyer practising in Ankara. 2.     The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. 3.     The applicant complained about the strip search she was subjected to on her arrival at the Ankara Female Closed Prison, from a hospital. 4.     The application was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited twice to submit her own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s last letter. 5.     By a letter dated 6 February 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of her observations had expired on 14 October 2013, after a prolongation, and that no further 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. 6.     The applicant’s representative received this letter on 18 February 2014. However, no response has been received. THE LAW 7.     The Court considers that, in the circumstances described above, 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. 8.     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 6 April 2017.   Hasan Bakırcı   Ksenija Turković Deputy Registrar   President