FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 22003/10
Maciej MATUSZEWSKI
against Poland
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 18 June 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Päivi Hirvelä, President,
Ledi Bianku,
Paul Mahoney, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 7 April 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Maciej Matuszewski, is a Polish national, who was born in 1972 and lives in Zielona Góra.
The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms J. Chrzanowska, of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the length of his criminal proceedings.
The applicant’s complaint was communicated to the Government, who, by letter of 11 December 2012 submitted their proposal for a friendly settlement. A copy of that letter was forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his comments. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letters dated 18 February and 5 April 2013, sent by registered post to the applicant’s home address, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his comments had expired on 11 January 2013 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. Both letters came back as unclaimed. The applicant failed to inform the Registry about another address where he might be staying and has not to date resumed correspondence with the Court in the instant case.
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.
Fatoş AracıPäivi Hirvelä
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy