CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 13 janvier 2015

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB81E279F { width:179.94pt; display:inline-block } .s7602FED2 { width:18.21pt; display:inline-block } .sC1AC44A4 { width:228.11pt; display:inline-block }   FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 35405/10 Mykola Mykolayovych ONISHCHUK against Ukraine The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 13   January 2015 as a Committee composed of:   Boštjan M. Zupančič, President,   Helena Jäderblom,   Aleš Pejchal, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 June 2010, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr Mykola Mykolayovych Onishchuk, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1986 and is currently serving his sentence in prison. He was represented before the Court by Mr S. Zatynnyy, a lawyer practising in Rivne. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent. The applicant complained under Article 3 of the Convention that at the initial stage of investigation he had been ill-treated by the police and that no attempt had been made to effectively investigate his allegations of ill ‑ treatment. He further complained under Article 6   §   1 of the Convention that the court had unfairly convicted him relying on his self-incriminating statements which had been obtained by means of ill-treatment. Finally, he raised complaints under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention that he had not been provided with access to a lawyer as from the first questioning of him by the police. 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’s representative, who was invited to submit written observations on behalf of the applicant. No reply was received to the Registry’s letter. By letter dated 18 September 2014, sent by registered post, the applicant’s representative was notified that the period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 18 July 2014 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 letter was delivered on 29 September 2014. 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. Done in English and notified in writing on 5 February 2015. Stephen Phillips   Boštjan M. Zupančič   Registrar   President