CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 mai 2020

.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 } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s490D418E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; font-size:1pt } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s58699FB5 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .s614660D5 { width:197.36pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s6B02B696 { width:159.34pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s8BB6D734 { margin-right:9pt; margin-left:9pt; border-collapse:collapse; } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s1E56514F { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; font-size:14pt }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 4201/09 Cemal ŞEYLAN against Turkey and 3 other applications (see appended table)   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 14   May 2020 as a Committee composed of:   Ivana Jelić, President,   Arnfinn Bårdsen,   Darian Pavli, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants were represented by Mr Onur Gündoğdu, a lawyer practising in Kars. The applicants’ complaints under Article 1 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention concerning the designation of their land at Turkey’s border with Armenia as first degree military zone and the resulting restrictions on their use of the land, as well as their complaints under Article 6 §   1 of the Convention concerning the lack of adequate reasoning in the domestic courts’ decisions, were communicated to the Turkish Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. In their observations, the Government informed the Court that all of the applicants had died before communication of the cases. By a letter dated 6 September 2019 the applicants’ representative was invited to indicate by 4 October 2019 whether there were any heirs wishing to pursue the proceedings in respect of the applicants. His attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicants’ representative received this letter on 1 October 2019. However, no response has been received. THE LAW Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. As concerns application no. 4201/09, the Court notes from the certificate submitted by the Government that Mr Cemal Şeylan died on 2 June 2006, that is before the present application was lodged in his name on 17 January 2009. In accordance with the Court’s practice and with Article 34 of the Convention, applications can only be lodged by, or in the name of, individuals who are alive (see Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, § 96, ECHR 2014). It follows that a valid application on behalf of Mr Şeylan could not have been lodged with the Court (see Craciun and Others v. Romania (dec.), no.   60593/08, § 9, 18   January 2018) and that the application must be rejected as being incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. Turning to applications nos. 5818/09, 5820/09 and 5824/09, the Court observes that the applicants Mr Tahir Çatma, Mr Abdullah Gül and Mr   Hamit Şeyran died on 6 November 2009, 23 January 2019 and 25 May 2014, respectively. Following the Court’s letter dated 6 September 2019, none of the applicants’ heirs have come forward with a wish to pursue the proceedings in their names. In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention and the Protocols thereto, the Court, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of these applications. Accordingly, the cases should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares application no. 4201/09 inadmissible; Decides to strike applications nos. 5818/09, 5820/09 and 5824/09 out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 4 June 2020.   Liv Tigerstedt   Ivana   Jelić   Acting Deputy Registrar   President       No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Date of Decease 1.     4201/09 Şeylan v. Turkey 17/01/2009 Cemal ŞEYLAN 1944 Iğdır Deceased on 2 June 2006 2.     5818/09 Çatma v. Turkey 11/01/2009 Tahir ÇATMA 1961 Iğdır Deceased on 6 November 2009 3.     5820/09 Gül v. Turkey 17/01/2009 Abdullah GÜL 1921 Iğdır Deceased on 23 January 2009 4.     5824/09 Şeyran v. Turkey 17/01/2009 Hamit ŞEYRAN 1934 Iğdır Deceased on 25 May 2014 APPENDIX