CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 28 septembre 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 } .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 } .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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .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 }   SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 50951/14 Zekeriya ÖZ against Türkiye and 11 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 28   September 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 applicants and their representatives is set out in the appendix. The applicants’ complaints under Article 6 § 1 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 13 April 2023, sent by registered post, the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired 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. No reply to the letters has been received by the Court and there are 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 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 19 October 2023.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Frédéric Krenc   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applications raising complaints under Article 6 § 1 of the Convention   No. Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth   Represented by 1. 50951/14 Öz v. Türkiye 10/07/2014 Zekeriya ÖZ 1968   2. 71953/14 Kansız v. Türkiye 04/11/2014 Cihan KANSIZ 1969 Cemalettin MUTLU 3. 547/15 Kara v. Türkiye 17/12/2014 Celal KARA 1968   4. 20658/15 Yazar v. Türkiye 17/04/2015 Adem YAZAR 1968   5. 35471/15 Gelgör v. Türkiye 23/06/2015 Burhan GELGÖR 1970 Orhan TÜYSÜZOĞLU 6. 62574/15 Beytar v. Türkiye 02/12/2015 Ahmet BEYTAR 1975   7. 1012/16 Özgün v. Türkiye 21/12/2015 Akif ÖZGÜN 1968   8. 1451/16 Bayram v. Türkiye 17/12/2015 Muzaffer BAYRAM 1969 Bülent ÇİÇEKLİ 9. 4219/16 Koçaslan v. Türkiye 24/12/2015 Hüseyin KOÇASLAN 1974   10. 5617/16 Çağlar v. Türkiye 18/12/2015 Metin ÇAĞLAR 1972   11. 11775/16 Gündoğdu v. Türkiye 02/02/2016 Dursun Ali GÜNDOĞDU 1971   12. 11832/16 Özcan v. Türkiye 02/02/2016 Mesut ÖZCAN 1973