SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Applications nos. 60091/09 and 61432/09 by Mohammad Taghi RASHIDI and Others against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 29 June 2010 as a Chamber composed of:

Françoise Tulkens, President, Ireneu Cabral Barreto, Danutė Jočienė, András Sajó, Nona Tsotsoria, Işıl Karakaş, Kristina Pardalos, judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above applications lodged on 13 and 20 November 2009,

Having regard to the interim measures indicated to the respondent Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court and the fact that these interim measures have been complied with,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicants, whose names and birth years are listed in the annex are Afghan nationals. Ahmad Amiri stated before the Court that he was from Palestine and before the authorities that he was from Afghanistan . The applicants were represented before the Court by Mr A. Baba, a lawyer practising in Istanbul .

The applicants in application no. 60091/09 were apprehended in Izmir while trying to leave Turkey illegally on 20 October 2009. They were subsequently taken to Istanbul for deportation purposes. According to the information submitted by the Government, the applicants were granted temporary residence permits in Gaziantep and their asylum requests were under examination by the national authorities.

The applicants in application no. 61432/09 are six unaccompanied minors. Following their arrest near Izmir , they were taken to the Afghan Consulate in Istanbul where they were issued with voluntary repatriation documents on 19 November 2009. The following day they were taken to the airport in Istanbul for deportation purposes. According to the information submitted by the Government two of the applicants had fled while at the airport in Istanbul on 20 November 2009. It further appears from the documents submitted by the Government that the remaining applicants were set free and asked to report to the Governorship in Gaziantep and Ağrı respectively. Ahmad Amiri seems to be the only applicant who reported to the Ağrı Governorship and is currently sheltered at the Children ' s Protection Centre in Ağrı. Apparently the other applicants have fled and their whereabouts are not known.

PROCEDURE BEFORE THE COURT

On 13 and 20 November 2009 respectively, the applicants ' representative requested an interim measure under Rule 39 § 1 of the Rules of Court aimed at staying the applicants ' deportation to Afghanistan . The Court decided to indicate the interim measures until 4 December 2009 and 15 January 2010 respectively. Both parties were asked a number of questions and requested to submit factual information by 27 November 2009 and 8 January 2010 respectively. The applicants ' representative was further asked to submit the official application form for both applications and the authority forms for application no. 61432/09.

On 26 November 2009 the interim measure for application no. 60091/09 was prolonged until 15 January 2010 upon the Government ' s request and the applicants ' representative was reminded to send the authority forms for this application also.

On 11 December 2009 the applicants ' representative sent by fax the application form for application no. 61432/09. He however failed to reply to the Court ' s additional questions and to send the authority forms. The Government submitted their replies for both applications on 8 January 2010. On 15 January 2010 the Court prolonged the interim measures until the applicants ' asylum claims were examined by the national authorities and/or the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees . Additionally the Government ' s submissions in both applications were forwarded to the applicants ' representative who was re-requested to submit, inter alia, the authority forms by 1 March 2010, with a strike out warning in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Both parties were further requested to keep the Court informed regularly of the asylum proceedings in respect of both applications.

The Government submitted additional information and documents on 1 March and 24 February 2010 for the respective applications, which were forwarded to the applicants ' representative on 9 March 2010.

In an attempt to obtain additional information and inquire about the authority forms for both applications, a member of the Court ' s registry telephoned the applicants ' representative on 29 March 2010.

Authority forms for both applications and the required information for application no. 60091/09 had still not been submitted to the Court by the date of adoption of the present decision.

COMPLAINTS

The applicants complained in particular that their removal to Afghanistan would expose them to a real risk of ill ‑ treatment, that they had been unlawfully detained and denied access to asylum proceedings and that they had no effective remedy before national authorities to prevent their deportation. They invoked Articles 3, 5, 13 and 34 of the Convention.

THE LAW

The Cour t finds it appropriate to join the cases, given the applicants ' common complaints.

The Court notes that, in spite of several requests made to the applicants ' representative, the authority forms for both cases as well as the full application form in application no. 60091/09 had not been submitted. In these circumstances, and having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the applications within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (c) 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. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.

In view of the above, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Rule 39 of the Rules of Court for both applications.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to join the applications;

Decides to strike the applications out of its list of cases.

Françoise Elens-Passos Françoise Tulkens Deputy Registrar President

ANNEX

List of applicants:

The parties submitted conflicting information on the names and birth years of some of the applicants, which are reflected in the list below.

Rashidi and Others v Turkey (application no. 60091/09)

Mohammad Taghi Rashidi (1972)

Moslehem Rashidi (1977)

Mahdi Rashidi (1996)

Zahra Rashidi (2003)

Maedeh Rashidi (2008)

Jafar Ekhtiyari (1988 or 1993 or 1995)

Mohammad Aman Nouri (1966)

Raziyeh Nouri (1970)

Basireh Nouri (1993)

Salehah Nouri (1993)

Zahra Nouri (1975)

Mohammad Nouri (1995)

Farzaneh Nouri (2003)

Zahra Nouri (1939)

Zaman and Others v Turkey (application no. 61432/09)

Muhammad Zaman or Hasseyni Mohammad (1993)

Ahmad Ahmadi (1995)

Nimetullah Omer or Nehmetullah Halili (1995)

Fardin Muhammad Arif or Ferdim Abibi (1995)

Amir Hussein or Emir Huseyin Irzat (1995 or 1996)

Ahmad Amiri (1996 or 1997)