THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 7108/06
by Andris TREIMANIS
against Latvia
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 3 May 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Josep Casadevall, President,
Alvina Gyulumyan,
Egbert Myjer,
Ineta Ziemele,
Luis López Guerra,
Mihai Poalelungi,
Kristina Pardalos, judges,
and Santiago Quesada, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 14 December 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
1. The applicant, Mr Andris Treimanis, is a Latvian national who was born in 1982 and lives in Talsi. The Latvian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms I. Reine.
2. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention of alleged ill-treatment by police officers in a short-term detention unit.
3. The applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his observations. The time-limit allowed for submission by the applicant of his observations were extended to
14 October 2010.
4. By a letter dated 16 December 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the name of his representative had expired on 30 September 2010, 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.
5. On 22 December 2010 the applicant was released from imprisonment in the Daugavpils Prison, and the latter forwarded the Court’s letter dated 16 December 2010 to the applicant’s civil address in Talsi. However, no response has been received and the applicant has not informed the Court of his new address.
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.
Santiago QuesadaJosep Casadevall
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy