CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 20 mars 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .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 } .s7E985A65 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; font-size:1pt } .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 } .sBF964C40 { width:8.54pt; display:inline-block } .sB09F7C54 { width:216.79pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block }     FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 28727/07 Mushfig SALIFOV against Azerbaijan   The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 20   March 2018 as a Committee composed of:   Erik Møse, President,   Síofra O’Leary,   Lәtif Hüseynov, judges, and Milan Blaško, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 2 July 2007, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE 1.     The applicant, Mr Mushfig Salifov, is an Azerbaijani national, who was born in 1981 and lives in İstanbul. He was represented before the Court by Mr K. Nasibov, a lawyer practising in Azerbaijan. 2.     The Azerbaijani Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr Ç. Asgarov. 3.     The applicant complained under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention about the unfairness of the domestic criminal proceedings as a whole. In particular, he complained that the domestic courts had failed to provide adequate reasons for their decisions concerning the admissibility and assessment of the evidence. The applicant further complained that his right to be defended by a lawyer of his choice had been restricted during the initial stages of the proceedings and that his lawyer had not been informed of a hearing before the Supreme Court on 4 May 2007. He also complained that he had been unable to properly examine witnesses against him. 4.     On 6 May 2016 the applicant’s complaints detailed above were communicated to the Government. 5.     On 23 September 2017 the Government submitted to the Registry their observations on the admissibility and merits of the application. These were forwarded to the applicant’s lawyer, who was invited to submit observations in reply by 7 November 2017. 6.     On 2 February 2018 the applicant informed the Court that he wanted to withdraw the application since he did not want to pursue the matter. THE LAW 7.     In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention or its Protocols, the Court, in accordance with Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention, considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application. 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 12 April 2018.   Milan Blaško   Erik Møse Deputy Registrar   President