SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 9900/07
Meşaik KARAKUŞ
against Turkey
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 15 November 2011 as a Committee composed of:
	Dragoljub Popović, President,
	András Sajó,
	Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, judges,
and Françoise Elens-Passos, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 January 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Meşaik Karakuş, is a Turkish national who was born in 1958 and lives in Kocaeli. He was represented before the Court by Mr E. Öztürk, a lawyer practising in Kocaeli. The Turkish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent.
The applicant complained under Article 1 of Protocol No.1 to the Convention about the non-execution of a domestic court judgment as well as lack of any effective remedies in respect of his complaint concerning the non-payment of his money. He also alleged that he had sustained an economical loss as a result of low interest rate applied to the state debts despite the high inflation in Turkey.
On 11 October 2010 the Court decided to give notice to the Government of the applicant’s complaints detailed above.
On 13 April 2011 the Government submitted to the Registry their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application, as well as the protocol for the release from debt (ibraname) dated 5 September 2008. These were forwarded on 12 May 2011 to the applicant, who was, invited to submit observations in reply by 21 June 2011
On 15 June 2011 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant wished to withdraw the application since the administration has made a certain payment in the meantime and the above mentioned protocol was signed by the parties. With this protocol, the applicant accepted that he would not claim any additional compensation.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.
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	Dragoljub Popović
	Deputy Registrar	President