FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 29762/09
Vladimir Danilovich MIKHALCHENKO
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 1 October 2013 as a Committee composed of:
Khanlar Hajiyev, President,
Julia Laffranque,
Dmitry Dedov, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 3 April 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Vladimir Danilovich Mikhalchenko, is a Russian national, who was born in 1957 and lives in Kuragino, a village in the Krasnoyarsk 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 complained under Article 6 of the Convention of various shortcomings in the criminal proceedings against him which ended on 26 February 2009. In particular, he complained that neither he nor his counsel had been duly notified of the appeal hearing of his criminal case and as a result he had not been provided with an opportunity to defend himself effectively before the appeal court.
The applicant’s complaint concerning holding the appeal hearing in his and his counsel’s absence was 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 his own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By letter dated 27 March 2013, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 2 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. The applicant received this letter on 16 May 2013. However, no response has been received.
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.
André WampachKhanlar Hajiyev
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy