CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITY;ENG — 25 mars 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 } .sC702907E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s4A0CEAF8 { width:194.77pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block } FIRST SECTION DECISION Application no. 7588/08 by Zlatko PREŽEC against Croatia The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 25   March   2010 as a Chamber composed of:   Christos Rozakis, President,   Nina Vajić,   Elisabeth Steiner,   Khanlar Hajiyev,   Dean Spielmann,   Giorgio Malinverni,   George Nicolaou, judges, and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar , Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 June 2007, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Zlatko Prežec, is a Croatian national who was born in 1972 and is currently serving a prison term. The Croatian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs Š. Stažnik. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. Following a criminal conviction for murder, the applicant was sent to serve his sentence of twelve years’ imprisonment in Lepoglava State Prison on 15 December 1997. Since that date he has served his sentence in various prisons in Croatia. Course of the events as described by the applicant While incarcerated in Gospić Prison, on 27 May 2007 at about 1 p.m. he was taken to an office and beaten up by two prison guards. They also threatened him with further beatings. He was then returned to his cell, which he shared with another inmate. At about 6 p.m. the applicant became sick and vomited. His cellmate called a guard. The applicant told the guard that he had been beaten in the morning by two other guards. Two guards took the applicant to the Gospić General Hospital. The applicant was examined there by a physician in the presence of N.Č., the head of the Security Department of Gospić Prison, who had meanwhile appeared. When the physician attempted to record the applicant’s injuries, N.Č. warned him not to make any such record. The applicant nevertheless asked the physician to record his injuries, at which N.Č. threatened to “finish what the guards have started”. Another physician questioned the applicant about his mental condition. The applicant was administered two injections and returned to Gospić Prison. On 29 May 2007 the applicant was visited in prison by two friends. The visit was carried out in the presence of a prison guard. The friends informed the Head Office of the Prison Administration about the incident of 27 May 2007 but no steps have so far been taken. A few days later, when his bruises had become almost unnoticeable, the prison physician examined the applicant. The examination was carried out in the presence of N.Č. and the applicant did not mention the beating. The applicant asked the prison nurse, a close relative of N.Č., for his medical documentation from the Gospić General Hospital. He was told that no such documentation existed. The medical report of 4 June 2007, drawn up at the Gospić General Hospital, states that the applicant complained that he had been beaten in prison. On 18 June 2007 the applicant drew up a criminal complaint about the said incident, addressed to the State Attorney’s Office. However, the complaint was not forwarded by the prison authorities Course of the events as described by the Government On 27 May 2007 at about 1 p.m, during the lunch in Gospić Prison, the applicant grabbed a television cable and threatened to hang himself. The guards managed to take the cable from the applicant after which he calmed down and took his lunch. At about 2 p.m. the same day, the applicant complained that two guards had beaten him. He was taken to the Gospić General Hospital where no injuries were recorded. COMPLAINT The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that he had been beaten up by the prison guards in Gospić Prison and that his attempts to lodge a criminal complaint in that connection had been unsuccessful. THE LAW By letter dated 18 September 2009 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 30 October 2009. By letter dated 7 January 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 30 October 2009 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 13 January 2010. 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   Christos Rozakis   Registrar   President