FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 61186/09
by Georgia
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16 March 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Peer Lorenzen, President,
Renate Jaeger,
Anatoly Kovler,
Mark Villiger,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Nona Tsotsoria,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Claudia Westerdiek, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the submissions of 16 November 2009 by the Government of Georgia, processed under file no 61189/09,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
PROCEDURE
On 16 November 2009, the Government of Georgia requested the Court to “demand the Russian Federation 1) to comply with its obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights, including the decision of the Court of 12 August 2008 [to apply rule 39 of the Rules of Court (interim measures)] and 2) to ensure prompt and unconditional release of four Georgian minors in custody of the proxy regime in Tskhinvali Region/South Ossetia.”
On 24 November and 8 December 2009, the President decided to adjourn the decision on the application of Rule 39 requesting further information from the parties concerning the detention conditions of these minors. The parties replied on 3 and 11 December 2009 respectively.
Following two visits to South Ossetia by the Human Rights Commissioner of the Council of Europe, the four Georgian minors and a further one who had been previously detained were released on 2 and 21 December 2009.
On 21 December 2009, the President informed the parties that there was no need to rule on the request of the Government of Georgia of 16 November 2009 for interim measures. Furthermore, the Government of Georgia were invited to inform the Court by 30 January 2010 whether they wished to maintain their application.
On 29 January 2010, the Government of Georgia informed the Court that they no longer wished to maintain the above application.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.
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.
Claudia WesterdiekPeer Lorenzen
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy