FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 24649/06
by Pavel Grigoryevich ROGOZIN
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 30 August 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Nina Vajić, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Peer Lorenzen,
George Nicolaou,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Julia Laffranque,
Linos-Alexandre Sicilianos, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 20 May 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Pavel Grigoryevich Rogozin, is a Russian national who was born in 1969 and lives in the town of Rezh in the Sverdlovsk Region. He is represented before the Court by Ms L. Prikhozheva, a lawyer practising in Yekaterinburg. 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 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention in facility no. 66/1 in Yekaterinburg, under Article 5 of the Convention about the alleged unlawfulness of his arrest and the excessive length of his detention on remand, and under Article 6 of the Convention about the unfairness and the excessive length of the criminal proceedings against him.
The applicant’s complaints concerning conditions of his detention and the length of his detention were communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was, invited to submit observations in reply. No response was received to the Court’s letter.
By letter dated 1 February 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the observations had expired on 19 November 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant’s representative’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. No response followed.
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.
Søren NielsenNina Vajić
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy