CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 30 juin 2022

.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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s96D82958 { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; 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 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD7287D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:9pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 22706/20 N.M. against Russia (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 30 June 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Darian Pavli, President,   Andreas Zünd,   Mikhail Lobov, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 11   June 2020, Having regard to the decision to grant the applicant   anonymity, in accordance with Rule 47 § 4 of the Rules of the Court, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The applicant’s details are set out in the appendix. The applicant’s complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the repeated authorisation by the Supreme Court of Russia of his extradition to Uzbekistan following findings of the Court that the applicant’s rights under Article 3 of the Convention would be violated in case of his removal to his country of origin (see N.M. v. Russia , no. 29343/18, 3 December 2019) were communicated to the Russian Government. On 12 June 2020 the Court decided to indicate to the respondent Government, under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, that the applicant should not be removed from Russia for the duration of the proceedings before it. On 14 June 2022 the applicant’s representative informed the Court of the applicant’s wish to withdraw his application. He submitted that, in view of the recent cases of removals of the individuals despite the interim measures being granted by the Court, lodging a complaint and a request for interim measures with the UN Human Rights Committee was the applicant’s only chance to prevent his removal to the country of origin. 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). Considering that the applicant has not been forcibly removed yet and that he made his request with genuine intent to better safeguard his interests, the Court, in accordance with Article   37 § 1 in fine , 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 application should be struck out of the list. The interim measure previously indicated by the Court with respect to the applicant consequently comes to an end. 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 July 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Darian Pavli   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX Application no. Case name Lodged on Applicant Year of Birth Place of Residence Nationality Represented by State of destination Date of letter to the Registry with withdrawal request 22706/20 N.M. v. Russia 11/06/2020 N. M. 1969 Novosibirsk Uzbekistan Kirill ZHARINOV   Daria Vladimirovna TRENINA   Eleonora DAVIDYAN Uzbekistan 14/06/2022