SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 44085/08
Ruslan STRATAN
against the Republic of Moldova
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 10 September 2019 as a Committee composed of:
Egidijus Kūris, President,
Valeriu Griţco,
Darian Pavli, judges,
and Hasan Bakırcı, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 September 2008,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ruslan Stratan, is a Moldovan national, who was born in 1975 and lives in Chișinău. He was represented before the Court by Mr V. Corobovțev, practicing in Chișinău.
The Moldovan Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr L. Apostol.
Mr Stratan was accused of fraud. After having been acquitted by the first-instance court he went abroad and no longer appeared at trial. His lawyer, Mr Corobovțev, failed to appear at several hearings and was eventually replaced by a State-appointed lawyer.
On 2 September 2008 an application form was introduced on behalf of the applicant and signed by Mr Valerii Corobovțev. No authority form was enclosed.
COMPLAINT
The applicant complained under Article 6 § 3(c) of the Convention about the replacement of the lawyer he had appointed without his knowledge and agreement.
THE LAW
The Court reiterates that, where the application is not lodged by the alleged victims themselves, Rule 45 § 3 of the Rules of Court requires a written authority to act, duly signed, to be produced. It is essential for representatives to demonstrate that they have received specific and explicit instructions from the alleged victim on whose behalf they purport to act before the Court (see Lambert and Others v. France [GC], no.46043/14, § 91, ECHR 2015 (extracts), with further references).
In the instant case, the application form was not signed by Mr Stratan who was listed as the applicant. No authority form authorising Mr Corobovțev to act on his behalf has been provided. Moreover, there have been no apparent reasons to consider that Mr Stratan was a vulnerable person who was not able to lodge complaints to the Court himself (compare Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania ([GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014).
Regard being had to the above, the Court concludes that Mr Corobovțev did not have standing to introduce the application on behalf of Mr Stratan. It follows that the application is incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention pursuant to Article 35 § 3 (a) and must be rejected pursuant to Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Declares the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 3 October 2019.
Hasan BakırcıEgidijus Kūris
Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy