FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 26989/06
by Igor Anatolyevich NOVIKOV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 23 August 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Nina Vajić, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Peer Lorenzen,
Elisabeth Steiner,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Julia Laffranque,
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 31 May 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Igor Anatolyevich Novikov, is a Russian national who was born in 1961 and lives in Taganrog, Rostov Region. 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’s complaints under Article 5 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention concerning the unlawfulness and excessive length of his detention on remand 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 observations in reply. No reply was received to the Court’s letter.
By letter dated 1 February 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 19 November 2010 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 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.
Søren NielsenNina Vajić
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy