THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 20439/08
Aleksandr Ivanovich SAZHIN
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 17 October 2017 as a Committee composed of:
Helen Keller, President,
Pere Pastor Vilanova,
Alena Poláčková, judges,
and Fatoş Aracı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 February 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Ivanovich Sazhin, is a Russian national, who was born in 1955 and was detained in Lensk.
The applicant’s complaint under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 (c) of the Convention concerning his lawyer’s absence from the appeal hearing in his criminal case was communicated to the Russian Government (“the Government”) on 18 January 2017.
The Russian Government ("the Government") were represented initially by Mr G. Matyushkin, the Representative of the Russian Federation to the European Court of Human Rights, and then by his successor in that office, Mr M. Galperin.
On 21 March 2017 the Government submitted observations on the admissibility and merits.
These submissions were transmitted to the applicant, who was invited to comment by 31 July 2017. The letter was sent back to the Court by the Russian Post on 12 July 2017 with indication that the applicant had relocated, without leaving a new address for correspondence.
The applicant failed to inform the Registry about any change of address or provide an alternative one and did not, to date, resume contact with the Court.
All previous correspondence on the Registry’s side has remained unanswered. In fact, the applicant has not contacted the Court since 3 September 2008.
THE LAW
The Court reiterates that under Rule 47 § 7 of the Rules of Court applicants shall keep the Court informed of any change of address and of all circumstances relevant to the application. The Court considers that the applicant’s failure to inform the Registry about the developments in his case, the change of his address, and the absence of any correspondence from him for nine years, indicate that he has lost interest in the complaint and 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 November 2017.
Fatoş AracıHelen Keller
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy