FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22287/05
by Slavko BOBANOVIĆ
against Croatia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 27 September 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrL. Loucaides,
MrsN. Vajić,
MrK. Hajiyev,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens,
MrG. Malinverni, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 21 May 2005,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together.
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Slavko Bobanović, is a Croatian national who was born in 1969 and lives in Biograd na Moru. He was represented before the Court by Mr Ð. Radović, a lawyer practising in Biograd na Moru. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
Following a bill of indictment of 7 April 1992, charging the applicant with aggravated theft, the Zadar Municipal Court committed the applicant for trial in absentia on 24 October 2001.
In his following appeal of 3 November 2001 the applicant stated that he had been employed in the Service for the Protection of Constitutional Order (Služba za zaštitu ustavnog poretka) until mid 1998 and that although his address had been known to the authorities, he had not been informed of the charges brought against him.
On 5 November 2001 the Zadar Municipal Court held a hearing and by its judgment of the same day convicted the applicant of aggravated theft and gave him a suspended sentence of six months’ imprisonment. The first instance judgment was upheld by the Zadar County Court (Županijski sud u Zadru), on 14 January 2002.
The subsequent applicant’s constitutional complaint was dismissed by the Constitutional Court (Ustavni sud Republike Hrvatske) on 2 February 2005 as being manifestly ill-founded.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained that his right to a fair trial had been violated because he had not been informed of the charges brought against him and given an opportunity to defend himself either in person or through legal assistance of his own choosing.
THE LAW
The Court recalls that notice of the application was given to the Government on 11 January 2007. The Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the applicant’s complaint on 3 April 2007. The applicant, who was represented by a lawyer, has failed to submit observations in reply. Moreover, he has failed to respond to the communications from the Court, the last of which was a registered letter dated 5 June 2007 warning the applicant of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list if he failed to respond.
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 further examination of this case. Accordingly, the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention to the case should be discontinued and the application struck off the list of cases.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy