FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 48905/08
Gleb Aleksandrovich PAKULO
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 24 March 2015 as a Committee composed of:
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska, President,
Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque,
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, judges,
and André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 15 September 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Gleb Aleksandrovich Pakulo, is a Russian national, who was born in 1968 and lives in Moscow He was represented before the Court by Mr A. Surin, a lawyer practising in Moscow.
The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the inability to examine witnesses, whose testimony was used for conviction.
The applicant’s complaint 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 4 November 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 11 September 2014 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’s representative received this letter on 2 December 2014. 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.
Done in English and notified in writing on 16 April 2015.
André WampachMirjana Lazarova Trajkovska
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy