FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 33336/06
Aleksandr Vladimirovich BARANOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 13 December 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Nina Vajić, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Peer Lorenzen,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos,
Erik Møse, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 May 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Vladimirovich Baranov, is a Russian national who was born in 1970 and lives in Dno. His application was lodged on 17 May 2006. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Article 5 of the Convention that his pre-trial detention in the period from 11 November 2005 to 19 January 2006 had been unlawful and not founded on relevant and sufficient reasons.
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, who was invited to submit his own observations by 15 July 2011. No reply was received.
By letter dated 8 September 2011 sent by registered mail, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 15 July 2011 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 applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicant received this letter on 21 September 2011. 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.
Søren NielsenNina Vajić
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy