SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 52266/07 Şehmus ÖZSUBAŞI against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 18 September 2012 as a Committee composed of:

Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre , President , Guido Raimondi, Helen Keller, judges,

and Françoise Elens-Passos , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 October 2007,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Şehmus Özsubaşı , is a Turkish national, who was born in 1972 and lives in Kırıkkale He is represented before the Court by Ms F. Kalaycı , a lawyer practising in Ankara . The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.

The applicant mainly complained about unlawful tapping of his telephone conversations with his lawyer, denial of his right to a fair hearing and lack of effective remedies in domestic law. He relied on Articles 6, 8 and 13 of the Convention.

The applicant ’ s aforementioned complaints were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letter dated 21 March 2022, sent by registered post, the applicant ’ s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 10 January 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. 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 representative received this letter on 30 March 2012. However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

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.

Françoise Elens-Passos Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre Deputy Registrar President