CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 23 mars 2023

.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 } .s46DB5BA6 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s459D9084 { width:131.09pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .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 }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 7942/18 Ahmet ATILGAN against Türkiye and 8 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 23   March 2023 as a Committee composed of:   Frédéric Krenc , President ,   Diana Sârcu,   Davor Derenčinović , 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 and their representatives 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 letter. By letters dated 19 October 2022, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations   had expired on 12 September 2022 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 registered letters either returned to the Court as unclaimed or were received by the applicants, to which they did not respond. There are also no previous letters from the applicants informing the Court about the change of address. 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 cases 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 13 April 2023.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Frédéric Krenc   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 5 of the Convention   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by 1. 7942/18 Atılgan v. Türkiye 23/01/2018 Ahmet ATILGAN 1973 Kocaeli Turkish   2. 11786/18 Ören v. Türkiye 27/02/2018 Fahrettin ÖREN 1984 Düzce Turkish   3. 13649/18 Tayman v. Türkiye 09/03/2018 Murat TAYMAN 1985 İzmir Turkish Berrin TAYMAN 4. 14500/18 Altay v. Türkiye 16/03/2018 Numan ALTAY 1984 Kahramanmaraş Turkish Gökhan GÜNAYDIN 5. 14565/18 Özer v. Türkiye 16/03/2018 Durakan ÖZER 1971 Manisa Turkish Gökhan GÜNAYDIN 6. 40911/18 Can v. Türkiye 10/08/2018 Ali CAN 1973 London Turkish   7. 41230/18 Pekkürkcü v. Türkiye 18/08/2018 Muammer PEKKÜRKCÜ 1989 Konya Turkish Mikail Furkan YİĞİT 8. 41846/18 Şenliler v. Türkiye 17/08/2018 Turgay ŞENLİLER 1967 Yozgat Turkish Haşim ÖZÇELİK 9. 42901/18 Kara v. Türkiye 06/09/2018 Olcay KARA 1985 Kütahya Turkish Enes ÖZTÜRK