DEMYANENKO proti Rusku

FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 27034/12
Aleksandr Vasilyevich DEMYANENKO
against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 9 December 2014 as a Committee composed of:

Khanlar Hajiyev, President,
Julia Laffranque,
Dmitry Dedov, judges,
André Wampach, Deputy Section Registrar.

Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 April 2012,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Vasilyevich Demyanenko, is a Russian national, who was born in 1981 and lives in St Petersburg. He was represented before the Court by Mr A. Suprunenko, a lawyer practising in St Petersburg.

2. The Russian Government (“the Government”) were represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.

3. The applicant complained, among other things, under Article 5 of the Convention about his excessively long pre-trial detention without relevant and sufficient reasons.

4. This complaint was communicated to the Government, who on 5 July 2013 submitted their observations. By letter dated 12 July 2013 these submissions were forwarded to the applicant’s representative, who was invited to submit their observations in reply. No reply has been received to the Registry’s letter.

5. By letter dated 21 May 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired and that no extension of time had been requested. The 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.

6. The applicant’s representative received this letter on 17 June 2014. However, no response has been received.

THE LAW

7. 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.

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.

André Wampach Khanlar Hajiyev
Deputy Registrar President