THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 3303/11
Samira MAHAMED SAMBUTO
against the Netherlands
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 19 January 2016 as a Committee composed of:
Helen Keller, President,
Johannes Silvis,
Alena Poláčková, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 January 2011,
Having regard to the interim measure indicated in the present application to the Netherlands Government under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, and the fact that this interim measure has been complied with,
Having regard to the factual information submitted by the Government of Italy and the Government of the Netherlands, and the applicant’s written comments in reply,
Having regard to the decision of 24 March 2015 to lift the interim measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Ms Samira Mahamed Sambuto, is an Ethiopian national who was born in 1979. She was represented before the Court by Mr B.W.M. Toemen, a lawyer practising in Den Bosch.
2. The Netherlands Government were represented by their Agent, Mr R.A.A. Böcker, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Italian Government were represented by their Agent, Ms E. Spatafora, and their co‑Agent, Ms P. Accardo.
3. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that there were substantial grounds for believing that she and her two sons, who are minors, would be subjected to treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention if transferred to Italy pursuant to Council Regulation (EC) no. 343/2003 of 18 February 2003 (“the Dublin Regulation”), due to the poor conditions prevailing in reception facilities for asylum seekers in that country. Furthermore, the applicant feared that she would be deported to her country of origin or a third country where she would risk treatment in breach of Article 3, without due consideration of her asylum application in Italy.
4. On 14 January 2011 the Acting President of the Section decided, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, to indicate to the Netherlands Government that it was desirable in the interest of the parties and the proper conduct of the proceedings before the Court not to expel the applicant to Italy until further notice.
5. On 24 March 2015 the Chamber decided to lift the Rule 39 indication, having noted factual information received from the Italian and Netherlands Governments and the applicant’s written comments in reply.
6. By letter of 5 August 2015 the Netherlands Government submitted to the Court additional factual information. The applicant was invited to submit her written comments by 20 August 2015. At the request of the applicant, the President of the Section extended the time allowed for submissions by the applicant to 4 September 2015.
7. On 31 August 2015 the Netherlands Government submitted to the Court a copy of a letter of 26 August 2015, in which the Immigration and Naturalisation Service (Immigratie- en Naturalisatiedienst) informed the Italian authorities that the applicant’s transfer to Italy could not take place because she had left for an unknown destination. A copy was sent by the Registry to the applicant’s representative, who was also asked to inform the Court whether he still has contact with the applicant (and if so, in what manner). His 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.
8. By letter of 3 September 2015 the applicant’s representative informed the Court that he is no longer in contact with the applicant and that he is thus unable to state whether or not she is still interested in pursuing the application.
THE LAW
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 11 February 2016.
Marialena TsirliHelen Keller
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy