CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 29 mai 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s5BA5B7C7 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; 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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s7714A00D { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s260B30F2 { width:16.02pt; display:inline-block } .sAF759458 { width:174.62pt; display:inline-block } .s64406319 { width:11.68pt; display:inline-block } .s7B0354FA { width:193.28pt; display:inline-block }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 14457/06 Vasile MITREA against Romania The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 29   May   2012 as a Committee composed of:   Alvina Gyulumyan, President,   Ineta Ziemele,   Kristina Pardalos, judges, and Marialena Tsirli, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 April 2006, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicant, Mr Vasile Mitrea, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1972 and lives in Roman. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their   Agent, Ms   I.   Cambrea, of the Ministry of Foreign Affaires. The applicant mainly alleged that he had been subjected to ill ‑ treatment in violation of Article 3 of the Convention and that the authorities had not carried out a prompt and effective investigation of that incident. The applicant’s complaints 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 by 15 September 2011. He was also requested to appoint counsel according to Rule 36 §§ 2 and 4 of the Rules of Court. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 21 November 2011, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations and designation of a counsel had expired and that no extension of time had been requested. His 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. He was invited to submit the missing information by 19   December   2011. The applicant received this letter on 5   December   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 Tsirli   Alvina Gyulumyan   Deputy Registrar   President