FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7983/10
Aleksandr Viktorovich TOKAREV
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 12 September 2019 as a Committee composed of:
André Potocki, President,
Ganna Yudkivska,
Yonko Grozev, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 May 2010,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Viktorovich Tokarev, is a Ukrainian national, who was born in 1976 and is serving a sentence of life imprisonment in Vinnytsya prison no. 1.
The applicant complained, in particular, about the conditions of his detention and the ban on long-time family visits. He also alleged that he had been ill-treated in prison and that there had been no effective domestic investigation into the matter.
On 14 November 2018 notice of the above complaints was given to the Ukrainian Government (“the Government”), and the remainder of the application was declared inadmissible pursuant to Rule 54 § 3 of the Rules of Court.
The case was communicated to the Government together with that of Tyuryukov v. Ukraine (no. 35627/10), in which the applicant is also a life prisoner who occasionally shared a cell with the applicant in the present case and who raised similar complaints.
The Court informed the applicant, who was represented by Ms Tyuryukova (the mother of Mr Tyuryukov – see above), about the necessity to be represented by an advocate at this stage of the proceedings. The applicant was instructed to appoint an advocate by 1 February 2019. Similar instructions were given to Mr Tyuryukov.
On 25 January 2019 Ms Tyuryukova sent an authority form, by which her son re-appointed her as his representative. It was suggested in her letter that she was also continuing to act on behalf of the applicant in the present case.
On 14 February 2019 the Court wrote to the applicant and to Mr Tyuryukov, through Ms Tyuryukova, that she did not comply with the requisite requirements. Their attention was repeatedly drawn to Rule 36 §§ 2 and 4 of the Rules of Court regarding the mandatory legal representation at that stage of the proceedings.
While Mr Tyuryukov appointed an advocate on 24 April 2019, the applicant in the present case did not respond to the Court’s letter.
On 29 March 2019 the Court sent a copy of its letter of 14 February 2019 to the applicant directly to the prison in case it had not reached him. A new deadline was established for him to appoint an advocate, by 30 April 2019. The Court also warned the applicant that, in case of his failure to appoint a lawyer, the Court might conclude that he was no longer interested in pursuing the application and decide to strike it out of its list of cases.
According to the postal receipt, signed presumably by a member of the prison staff, the Court’s letter was received at Vinnytsya prison on 9 April 2019. However, there has been no response to it.
THE LAW
In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the application (Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention) (see, for example, Grimaylo v. Ukraine (dec.), no. 69364/01, 7 February 2006, and Bubskiy v. Ukraine (dec.) [Committee], no. 64220/13, 13 September 2018). 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.
Accordingly, the case should be struck 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 3 October 2019.
Liv TigerstedtAndré Potocki
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy