SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 3670/09 Eram AKYÃœZ against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 23 January 2018 as a Committee composed of:

Ledi Bianku , President, Nebojša Vučinić , Jon Fridrik Kjølbro , judges, and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 30 December 2008,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The applicant, Mr Eram Akyüz , a Turkish national, was born in 1973 and at the time of lodging his application he was serving his prison sentence in the Kırıkkale F-type prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Vargün , a lawyer practising in Troisdorf.

The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

On 21 March 2008 the applicant wrote a letter to the Ministry of Justice, in which he had praised the imprisoned leader of the PKK, Abdullah Öcalan by using the honorific “ sayın ”, meaning esteemed.

Pursuant to the Regulations on the administration of penitentiary institutions and the execution of sentences, the applicant was found guilty of breaching prison order by the Kırıkkale F- type Prison Disciplinary Board (referred hereafter as “the Board”).

On 31 March 2008 the applicant was sentenced to 12 days ’ solitary confinement on the orders of the Board, on account of his statements in the above mentioned letter.

On 14 May 2008 the Kırıkkale Enforcement Judge rejected the applicant ’ s objection.

On 30 May 2008 the Kırıkkale Assize Court upheld the judgment of 14 May 2008.

The applicant complained that the disciplinary punishment imposed on him for using the honorific “ sayın ” (esteemed), when referring to the imprisoned leader of the PKK in his letter, had constituted an unjustified interference with his right to freedom of expression under Article 10 of the Convention.

By a letter dated 21 June 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant ’ s representative was asked to indicate whether the applicant ’ s heirs wished to continue the application and to submit relevant documents regarding the latest developments in the domestic proceedings. The applicant ’ s representative ’ s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicant ’ s complaint under Article 10 was communicated to the Government on 12 December 2016. In their observations of 7 April 2017 on the admissibility and merits, the Government informed the Court that the applicant died on 31 March 2014.

On 1 June 2017 the Government ’ s written observations on the admissibility and merits of the case were sent to the applicant ’ s representative for comments. However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

The Court takes note of the fact that the applicant has died on 31 March 2014 and no member of his family or heir has expressed a wish to continue the proceedings before the Court in his stead.

The Court considers with reference to Article 37 § 1 (a) and (c) of the Convention that, in these circumstances, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. 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 case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

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

Done in English and notified in writing on 15 February 2018 .

Hasan Bakırcı Ledi Bianku              Deputy Registrar President