SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 58053/10 Serkan DURSUN against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights ( Second Section ), sitting on 25 November 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Paul Lemmens , President, Robert Spano , Jon Fridrik Kjølbro , judges, and Abel Campos , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 August 2010 ,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. The applicant, Mr Serkan Dursun , is a Turkish national, who was born in 1973 and he was serving a life imprisonment in the Diyarbakır D-type Prison at the time of the application. He was represented before the Court by Mr H. Dursun. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

2. The applicant is disabled. He complains under Article 3 of the Convention about the prison conditions in Erzurum H-Type Prison where he was kept for sixteen months and was not adapted to his specific needs . The applicant ’ s complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant ’ s representative , who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

3. By a letter dated 10 July 2014 , sent by registered post, the applicant ’ s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 30 May 2014. 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. According to the information obtained from the official website of the Turkish Postal Service, on 1 August 2014 this letter was received by the representative. However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

4. The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) 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 case out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

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

Abel Campos Paul Lemmens              Deputy Registrar President