CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 4 mai 2023

.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 } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .sE0CCF380 { width:111.82%; border-collapse:collapse } .sAEEB25D2 { width:6.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE72A2AC3 { width:25.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sD5CD368B { width:34.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s9633BE02 { width:32.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s906D09D5 { width:6.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sF1C834A { width:25.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA13A896A { width:34.48%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sAA34C425 { width:32.78%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 31007/20 Alaa ASAAD and Others against the Netherlands (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 4   May   2023 as a Committee composed of:   Darian Pavli , President ,   Ioannis Ktistakis,   Oddný Mjöll Arnardóttir , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 27   July 2020, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants were represented by Mr A. Khalaf, a lawyer practising in Groningen. The applicants applied for an interim measure under Rule 39 and complained inter alia under Article 3 of the Convention about their expulsion to Greece. On 28 July 2020 the Court decided to indicate to the Government of the Netherlands, under Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court, that the applicants should not be expelled to Greece. On 28 August 2020 the applicants’ representative sent to the Court a completed application form. On 2 October 2020 the Court extended the interim measure under Rule   39 of the Rules of Court until further notice. The applicants’ complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning their expulsion to Greece was communicated to the Dutch Government (“the Government”), who submitted observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicants, who submitted their own observations. On 8 November 2022 the Government informed the Court that the decisions that formed the basis for the applicants’ expulsion to Greece had been withdrawn. A week later the Registry sent a letter to the applicants requesting to inform the Court whether they wished to maintain their application in the light of the Government’s information. No reply was received to this letter. By letter dated 19 December 2022, sent via the Court’s Electronic Communication Service (e-Comms), the applicants were notified that the period allowed for submission of their observations had expired on 13   December 2022 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicants’ 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. However, no response has followed. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, and in the absence of any special circumstances regarding respect for the rights guaranteed by the Convention and the Protocols thereto, 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. Consequently, there is no need to uphold the indicated interim measure. Accordingly, the interim measure should be lifted, and the case should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to lift the interim measure indicated under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court on 28 July 2020; Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 25 May 2023.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Darian Pavli   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth Nationality 1. Alaa ASAAD 1987 Stateless 2. Leen ARAB 2011 Syrian 3. May ARAB 2007 Syrian