FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 6320/06
by Oleg Vasilyevich ZAVALIY
against Russia
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 20 May 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
Christos Rozakis, President,
Anatoly Kovler,
Khanlar Hajiyev,
Dean Spielmann,
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni,
George Nicolaou, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 22 December 2005,
Having regard to the Court's decision to examine jointly the admissibility and merits of the case (Article 29 § 3 of the Convention),
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Oleg Vasilyevich Zavaliy, is a Russian national who was born in 1971 and lived until his arrest in the town of Priozyorsk, Leningrad Region. He is represented before the Court by
Mr B. Logvinenko, a lawyer practising in St Petersburg. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
Prosecution authorities instituted criminal proceedings against the applicant, suspecting him of having committed a number of aggravated robberies, whilst being a member of an organised criminal gang.
On 15 April 2004 the applicant was arrested. His detention was subsequently extended on a number of occasions in view of the gravity of the charges against him and his liability to abscond, re-offend and pervert the course of justice.
The outcome of the criminal proceedings against the applicant is unknown.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Article 5 § 1 (c) and §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention that his detention had been unlawful, that he had not been afforded an opportunity to attend certain detention hearings, that his detention had been extremely long and that the detention matters had been examined with an extreme delay.
THE LAW
By letter dated 22 September 2009 the Government's observations were sent to the applicant's representative, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 24 November 2009.
By letter dated 8 February 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant's representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant's observations had expired on 24 November 2009 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant's representative'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's representative received this letter on 19 March 2010. However, no response has followed.
The Court notes 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.
The Court therefore considers that Article 29 § 3 of the Convention should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the application out of its list of cases.
Søren NielsenChristos Rozakis
RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy