SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 5795/16
Đuro KLJAIĆ
against Serbia
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 9 February 2021 as a Committee composed of:
Valeriu Griţco, President,
Branko Lubarda,
Pauliine Koskelo, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 17 December 2015,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
1. The applicant, Mr Đuro Kljaić, is a Serbian national, who was born in 1949 and lives in Sremska Mitrovica. He was represented before the Court by Mr M. Jovanović, a lawyer practising in Niš.
The circumstances of the case
2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
3. In 1996 the applicant was found guilty of murder and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment by a court of the “Republic of Serbian Krajina”, an internationally unrecognised self-proclaimed entity established on the territory of the Republic of Croatia during the wars in the former Yugoslavia.
4. Shortly thereafter, the applicant was transferred to a Serbian prison from where he escaped in January 2000. On 29 November 2011 the applicant was arrested and sent to serve the remainder of his sentence until 19 May 2017 when he was released.
5. In the meantime, on 31 December 2013 the applicant lodged a constitutional appeal challenging his arrest and detention. On 23 June 2015 the Constitutional Court rejected his appeal.
6. On 28 October 2020 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that the applicant no longer wished to pursue the proceedings because the subject matter giving rise to his application had been resolved at the domestic level. Notably, he submitted that the applicant had received compensation for unlawful detention following a decision of the Serbian Ombudsman to that effect (which had been rendered in line with the Court’s judgment in the case of Mitrović v. Serbia, no. 52142/12, of 21 March 2017).
COMPLAINTS
7. The applicant complained under Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention about the lawfulness of his detention in the period between 29 November 2011 and 19 May 2017 and a lack of judicial review in that respect. He further invoked Article 6 complaining about the fairness and the length of the proceedings concerning the enforcement of his sentence.
THE LAW
8. Having regard to the applicant’s representative’s letter of 28 October 2020 (see paragraph 6 above), the Court considers that the applicant no longer wishes to pursue his complaints and that the matter raised by the case can be considered to have been resolved within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) and (b) of the Convention. Furthermore, the respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols does not require the Court to continue the examination of the application under Article 37 § 1 in fine.
9. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Done in English and notified in writing on 18 March 2021.
Hasan BakırcıValeriu Griţco
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy