FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 3683/19
Viktor Vasylyovych STRIKHAR
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 18 September 2025 as a Committee composed of:
María Elósegui, President,
Andreas Zünd,
Mykola Gnatovskyy, judges,
and Martina Keller, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 December 2018,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
1. The applicant, Mr Viktor Vasylyovych Strikhar, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1980 and, according to the available information as of 2019, lived in Volnovakha, Donetsk Region. His current whereabouts are unknown. The applicant was represented before the Court by Mr M. O. Tarakhkalo and Mr Y.V. Chekaryov, lawyers practising in Kyiv.
2. The case concerns various issues under Articles 3 and 34 of the Convention, in particular regarding the applicant’s alleged lack of relevant medical treatment for his diseases while in detention, the poor conditions of his detention and transportation, and the authorities’ alleged refusal to provide a copy of his medical documentation for the preparation of the present application to the Court.
3. On 25 July 2017 the Volnovakha Local Court of Donetsk Region convicted the applicant to 3 years and 2 months of imprisonment for theft. At the moment of his conviction, he was suffering from a number of diseases including the HIV, hepatitis, kidney failure, and thrombophlebitis. On 27 August 2018 he was released from serving prison sentence on health grounds and started living in Volnovakha city, Donetsk Region.
4. In 2024 the Court asked the applicant’s representative, Mr Tarakhkalo, to inform it on whether the applicant maintained his application and to provide an update on any developments in the case. In July 2024 the applicant’s another representative, Mr Chekaryov, informed that he had lost the contact with the applicant after the beginning of the full-scale aggression of Ukraine. According to the applicant’s representative, Volnovakha city has been fully destroyed following the military actions, and the respective area has been occupied by Russia in March 2022. On 26 May 2025 Mr Chekaryov stated once again that he had not been able to establish contact with the applicant.
THE LAW
5. The Court takes note of the information from Mr Chekaryov that he is not in contact with the applicant and that he has no information about his whereabouts. In this connection the Court reiterates that it is important that contact between the applicant and his or her representative be maintained throughout the proceedings. Such contact is essential both in order to learn more about the applicant’s particular situation and to confirm the applicant’s continuing interest in pursuing the examination of his or her application (see Sharifi and Others v. Italy and Greece, no. 16643/09, § 124, 21 October 2014, and, mutatis mutandis, Ali v. Switzerland, 5 August 1998, § 32, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1998‑V).
6. In the present case the Court observes that the applicant did not maintain contact with his lawyers and failed to keep them informed of his place of residence or to provide them with another means of contacting him. Accordingly, it considers that it can conclude on that basis that the applicant has lost interest in the proceedings and no longer intends to pursue the application within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention (see V.M. and Others v. Belgium (striking out) [GC], no. 60125/11, § 36, 17 November 2016 and further references therein).
7. The Court furthermore considers, on the basis of the available material, that the subject matter of the present case, although relying, among others, on the complaints under Articles 3 and 34 of the Convention, relates to repetitive issues on which the Court has developed well-established case-law. In this connection, 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.
8. 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 October 2025.
Martina Keller María Elósegui
Deputy Registrar President