FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 27650/05
by Vitaliy Vladimirovich SITNIKOV
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 16 November 2010 as a Committee composed of:
Rait Maruste, President,
Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 12 July 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The application was lodged by Mr Vitaliy Vladimirovich Sitnikov, a Ukrainian national who was born in 1971. At the time of the events, he was serving a prison sentence in Odessa Penitentiary no. 51. His actual place of residence is not known. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Y. Zaytsev.
On 12 June 2009 the Court decided to communicate the applicant’s complaints under Articles 3, 5 § 3 and 6 § 1 of the Convention concerning respectively the conditions of his detention during certain periods between 2002 and 2006, the length of his pre-trial detention and the length of the criminal proceedings against him.
By letter dated 23 February 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations in reply to those of the Government had expired on 8 December 2009 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.
In the absence of any report from the post service and reply from the applicant, on 1 July 2010 the Court sent another registered letter of the same contents, this time both to the applicant and to the representative indicated by him in the application form.
As confirmed by the signature of an administration official, on 10 July 2010 the Court’s letter was delivered to Odessa Penitentiary no. 51.
On 17 July 2010 the other copy of that letter was handed to the applicant’s representative.
There was however no reply from the applicant or his representative. The applicant’s last letter to the Court was dated 28 March 2007.
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.
Stephen PhillipsRait Maruste
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy