THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22325/10
Vakhtang EDIGARASHVILI
against Georgia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 10 July 2012 as a Committee composed of:
Ján Šikuta, President,
Ineta Ziemele,
Nona Tsotsoria, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 April 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Vakhtang Edigarashvili, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1988 and has been serving a five years prison sentence since 2009. He was represented before the Court by Mr Roland Asakashvili, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi. The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Levan Meskhoradze, of the Ministry of Justice.
On 5 October 2011 the Court gave notice to the respondent Government of the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the lack of treatment for his cardiac diseases in prison.
On 15 February 2012 the Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application, which included detailed medical information on the applicant’s state of health. Those submissions disclosed that he had started receiving the requisite treatment for his cardiac problems. The applicant benefited from permanent medical supervision and that his general condition remained stable.
By a letter of 2 March 2012, the applicant, instead of submitting his observations in reply to those of the Government, confirmed that the prison authorities had started dispensing the necessary treatment in prison and stated that the matter of the application was had thus been resolved on the domestic level and that he did not wish to pursue the proceedings before the Court.
The applicant’s request for withdrawal was confirmed by his representative on 2 April 2012. The representative added that, apart from having started providing the requisite treatment, the relevant authorities had also agreed to reduce the applicant’s prison sentence by one year.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, the Court considers that the applicant no longer wishes to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Acting under 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 application.
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.
Marialena Tsirli Ján Šikuta
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy