THIRD SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 8179/05
by Denis Alin Stelian VINTAN
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 22 November 2011 as a Committee composed of:
Ján Šikuta, President,
Ineta Ziemele,
Kristina Pardalos, judges,
and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 21 February 2005,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Denis Alin Stelian Vintan, is a Romanian national who was born in 1983 and lives in Arad. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Răzvan Horaţiu Radu, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant raised complaints under Articles 3, 5 and 6 of the Convention in relation with criminal proceedings against him and with his detention in Jilava Prison. The complaint under Article 3 concerning the material conditions of his detention were 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 own observations. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter.
By a letter dated 20 June 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 5 April 2011 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. The applicant received this letter on 28 June 2011. However, no response has been received.
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.
Marialena TsirliJán ŠikutaDeputy Registrar President
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy