CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 16 mai 2019

.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 } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s5F897A7E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s354F7CEB { width:27.79pt; display:inline-block } .sD407E162 { width:116.42pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block }     SECOND SECTION DECISION Application no. 4327/18 M.A. against Estonia   The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 16   May 2019 as a Committee composed of:   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström, President,   Arnfinn Bårdsen,   Darian Pavli, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 16 January 2018, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant, Mr M. A., was born in 1984. He was represented before the Court by Mr K. Lindeberg, a lawyer practising in Tallinn. The applicant’s complaint under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention concerning the length of his detention was communicated to the Estonian Government (“the Government”). On 5 February 2019 the Government notified the Court that the applicant had left Estonia and that his exact whereabouts were unknown. By letter dated 8 February 2019, sent to the applicant’s representative through the Court’s Electronic Communications Service (eComms), the applicant’s representative was requested to inform the Court by 8 March 2019 whether the applicant had maintained contact with him and had informed him of his exact place of residence and means of contacting him as well as of his intention to pursue the application. As the period allowed for replying to that letter expired on 8 March 2019 and no request for extension had been received, on 15   March 2019, the Court sent the representative a second letter in which his attention was drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application 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’s representative has not replied to either of the Court’s letters. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the application (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 the Protocols thereto which require the continued examination of the application. Accordingly, the case should be struck 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 6 June 2019.   Liv Tigerstedt   Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström   Acting Deputy Registrar   President