FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 46534/11
Aleksey Nikolayevich ALEKSEYEV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 18 December 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Nina Vajić, President,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Erik Møse, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 July 2011,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Aleksey Nikolayevich Alekseyev, is a Russian national who was born in 1975 and lives in Svintsovka, the Saratov Region.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Articles 3, 5 and 13 of the Convention that on 5 and 6 August 2010 he had been unlawfully detained and ill‑treated by the officers of the Saratov Department of the Federal Service of Drug Control and that the domestic investigation in his allegations of ill-treatment had been ineffective. He also complained under Article 6 of the Convention that the court proceedings concerning his complaint about the authorities’ inaction had been unfair.
By letter dated 12 September 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired on 19 June 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’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 applicants do not intend to pursue the application.
On 14 November 2012 the letter returned to the Court unclaimed.
THE LAW
Having regard to the correspondence with the applicant, the Court finds that he 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.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
André WampachNina Vajić
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy