SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 2111/13
Ion ROTARU
against the Republic of Moldova
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 16 May 2017 as a Committee composed of:
Ledi Bianku, President,
Valeriu Griţco,
Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 November 2012,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Ion Rotaru, is a Moldovan national, who was born in 1970 and lives in Hârbovăț.
The Moldovan Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Apostol.
The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that the forced medical treatment given to him in the psychiatric hospital amounted to inhuman and degrading treatment and that his forced hospitalisations (38 days in 2011 and 39 days in 2012) were unlawful and therefore contrary to Article 5 of the Convention.
The applicant’s complaints under Articles 3, 5 and 8 were 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 10 November 2016, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 15 July 2016 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 23 November 2016. 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 15 June 2017.
Hasan BakırcıLedi Bianku
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy