CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 2 juin 2022

.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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .sE13162EA { width:134.76pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .sE849C015 { width:102.18%; margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s1B5E5BBA { width:7.2%; 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 } .s889175DE { width:21.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sFB8CFB2 { width:15.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s51C3A1F4 { width:33.98%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .s5173E8E0 { width:22.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD604ECD3 { width:7.2%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s42028A2C { width:21.08%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFCA6A27E { width:15.1%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s4234397F { width:33.98%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6565FF6A { width:22.64%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 20319/18 Tuğrul HANÇERKIRAN against Turkey and 2 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 2   June 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Jovan Ilievski, President,   Gilberto Felici,   Diana Sârcu, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, 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’ various complaints under Article 5 of the Convention were communicated to the Turkish Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who were invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letters. By letters dated 20 October 2021 sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 6 September 2021 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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 letter sent in respect of application no. 1493/19 was received on 1 November 2021; however, no response followed. The letter could not be delivered to the applicant’s lawyer in application no. 44794/18 as he had apparently changed his address, which change was not notified to the Court, and the applicant in application no.   20319/18 did not claim the letter from the post office. 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. 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 the applications. Accordingly, the applications should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications ; Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 23 June 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Jovan Ilievski   Acting Deputy Registrar   President   APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 20319/18 21/04/2018 Tuğrul HANÇERKIRAN 1973 Gaziantep Turkish   2. 44794/18 07/09/2018 Sultani TEMEL 1990 Erzurum Turkish Mustafa TEMEL 3. 1493/19 21/12/2018 Emine ÖZDEMİR ŞEKER 1982 Adana Turkish