FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 4144/06
by Viktor LABUSHEV
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 11 December 2007 as a Chamber composed of:
MrC.L. Rozakis, President,
MrA. Kovler,
MrsE. Steiner,
MrK. Hajiyev,
MrD. Spielmann,
MrS.E. Jebens,
MrG. Malinverni, judges,
and Mr S. Nielsen, Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 24 December 2005,
Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Viktor Pavlovich Labushev, is a Russian national who was born in 1941 and lives in Blagoveshchensk. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mrs V. Milinchuk, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
In 2004 a criminal case was opened against the applicant on suspicion of tax evasion.
On 13 May 2005 the Blagoveshchensk Town Court of the Amur Region began trial hearings. The applicant signed an undertaking to appear.
On 1 June 2005 the Town Court decided to remand the applicant in custody because he did not appear at the hearing without good cause. On the same date counsel for the applicant lodged a statement of appeal with the registry of the Town Court. On 8 June 2005 the prosecutor filed his comments. On 14 June 2005 the Amur Regional Court examined and rejected the appeal. Counsel for the applicant was not present.
On 10 June 2005 the Town Court convicted the applicant of tax evasion and sentenced him to a fine of 200,000 Russian roubles. On 12 July 2005 the Amur Regional Court upheld the conviction on appeal.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that his arrest amounted to inhuman treatment.
The applicant complained under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention that the decision to take him into custody was not justified.
The applicant complained under Article 5 § 4 of the Convention that counsel’s appeal against the detention order of 1 June 2005 was not examined.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that the trial court evaluated the evidence to his disadvantage. Under Article 6 § 3 (d), he complained that the court founded the conviction on the written deposition by the witness A. who had repudiated his deposition before the trial.
THE LAW
The Court notes that, by letter of 26 June 2007, the Government’s observations were forwarded to the applicant who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 28 August 2007. No response was received from the applicant.
By letter of 12 September 2007 sent by registered mail, the applicant was advised that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired 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 would 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. No response has been received and the letter was returned as unclaimed.
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be considered 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 discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the case out of the Court’s list of cases.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy