CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 4 février 2010

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s507451D6 { width:4.53pt; display:inline-block } .s4B1E01CC { width:201.1pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 24764/07 by Ramiz BOJAGIĆ against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 4   February   2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Anatoly Kovler, President,   Nina Vajić,   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 5 June 2007, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Ramiz Bojagić, is a national of Bosnia and Herzegovina who is currently serving a prison term in Dubrovnik Prison. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. On 27 March and 7 November 2006 and 3 January 2007 the applicant sent letters to the Court in connection with a pending application. He was requested to hand in his letters to the prison authorities unsealed. On 2 July 2007 the applicant complained to the Varaždin County Court judge responsible for execution of sentences ( sudac izvršenja Županijskog suda u Varaždinu ) about the opening of his correspondence with the State administration, his lawyer and the Court. In a letter of 3 September 2007 the judge informed the applicant that all letters addressed abroad above a certain weight had to be handed over to a post office unsealed. He concluded that such a practice followed the rules of the postal service and had not been imposed by the prison authorities. COMPLAINTS The applicant complained under Article 8 of the Convention about the fact that the prison authorities had requested that his correspondence with the State administration, his lawyer and the Court be handed over unsealed. THE LAW By letter dated 10 September 2008 the Government's observations were sent to the applicant, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 22 October 2008. By letter dated 15 September 2009, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of the applicant's observations had expired on 22 October 2008 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 September 2009. However, no response has been received. 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.   Søren Nielsen   Anatoly Kovler   Registrar   President