SECOND SECTION

DECISION

Application s no s . 34328/08, 34329/08, 34333/08, 34336/08, 34339/08, 34343/08, 34344/08, and 34346/08 by Ä°kram KAYAN and Others against Turkey

The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 18 January 2011 as a Committee composed of:

Dragoljub Popović , President, András Sajó , Kristina Pardalos , judges, and Françoise Elens-Passos , Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application s lodged on 10 July 2008,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

PROCEEDINGS

The application s w ere lodged by eight Turkish national s, İkram Kayan , Cesim Karamercan , Muhyettin Gidici , Kazım Karamercan , Enver Alageyik , Cemal Ergün , Cesim Baytar , and Selahattin Keleş (“the applicants”), born in 1973 , 1956, 1961, 1973, 1968, 1956, 1962, and 1964, respectively and live in Bitlis . They are r epr esented before the Court by Mr İ . Kurt , lawyer practi sing in Van. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent .

The applicants ’ complaint s concerning non-execution of the domestic judgments were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant s , who w ere invited to submit their own observations. No reply was received to the Registry ’ s letter.

By letter dated 21 September 2010 , sent by registered post, the applicants ’ representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired on 4 May 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants ’ 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 do not intend to pursue the application. The applicants ’ representative received this letter on 28 September 2010 . However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

Given the similarity of the applications, as regards both fact and law, the Court deems it appropriate to join them.

The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant s may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue their application s , 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 join the applications;

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

Françoise Elens-Passos Dragoljub Popović Deputy Registrar President