BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
 |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | |
European Court of Human Rights |
||
|
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> European Court of Human Rights >> Shivan Zuher ALZUHARI v Lithuania - 16688/06 [2011] ECHR 1906 (18 October 2011) URL: http://www.bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2011/1906.html Cite as: [2011] ECHR 1906 |
||
[New search] [Contents list] [Printable RTF version] [Help]
SECOND SECTION
DECISION
Application no.
16688/06
by Shivan Zuher ALZUHARI
against
Lithuania
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 18 October 2011 as a Chamber composed of:
Françoise
Tulkens,
President,
Danutė
Jočienė,
David
Thór Björgvinsson,
András
Sajó,
Işıl
Karakaş,
Paulo
Pinto de Albuquerque,
Helen
Keller, judges,
and
Stanley Naismith,
Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 28 April 2006,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Shivan Zuher Alzuhari, is an Iraqi national who was born in 1974. He is represented before the Court by lawyers Mr L. Biekša and Ms M. Čirbaitė. The Lithuanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms E. Baltutytė.
On 16 February 2011 the applicant’s complaints under Article 5 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention were communicated to the Government.
By a letter of 14 March 2011, Mr L. Biekša informed the Court that he had lost all contact with the applicant, who had returned to Iraq.
By the Court’s letter dated 5 May 2011, sent by registered post, Ms M. Čirbaitė, the applicant’s second representative, was asked whether she had any contact with the applicant. On 25 May 2011 the letter was returned to the Court with a notice that the addressee had moved without leaving a forwarding address.
The Court has no information about the applicant’s whereabouts.
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.
Stanley
Naismith Françoise
Tulkens
Registrar President