FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 23389/07
Vyacheslav Fedorovich BOGDAN
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 5 March 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,
Ann Power-Forde,
Helena Jäderblom, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 May 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Vyacheslav Fedorovich Bogdan, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1954 and lives in Dnipropetrovsk.
The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were most recently represented by their Agent, Mr Nazar Kulchytskyy.
The applicant complained under Article 2 of the Convention about the alleged ineffectiveness of the domestic investigation into the murder of his daughter.
On 30 November 2011 the Court decided to communicate the application to the respondent Government.
By a letter of 5 December 2011 the applicant was informed about the aforementioned decision and was invited to appoint a lawyer for his representation in the proceedings before the Court by 9 January 2012. The letter remained without reply.
By another letter dated 2 May 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant was reminded about the necessity to be legally represented at that stage of the proceedings. He was notified that the deadline for him to appoint a lawyer had been extended until 29 May 2012. As confirmed by the post office, the applicant received this letter on 10 May 2012. However, there has been no response from him.
On 23 May 2012 the Government’s observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit his observations, together with any claims for just satisfaction, in reply by 4 July 2012. The applicant was repeatedly reminded about the requirement to appoint a legal representative. No correspondence from him followed.
By a letter dated 25 September 2012, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 4 July 2012 and that no extension of time had been requested. His 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. While the applicant received this letter on 6 October 2012, as confirmed by his signature on the post receipt, he did not respond.
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.
Stephen PhillipsBoštjan M. Zupančič
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy