A CINCIEA SECTIUNE DECIZIE Recurs nr. 23806/13 Volodymyr Stanislavovych SHCHUKIN împotriva Ucrainei și alte 10 cereri (vezi tabelul anexat) Curtea Europeană a Drepturilor Omului (Cea de-a Cincia Secțiune), întrunită la 21 noiembrie 2024 ca Comitet compus din: Diana Sârcu, Președintele, Kateřina Šimáčková, Mykola Gnatovskyy, judecători și Viktoriya Maradudina, Secretar adjunct al Secției, având în vedere cererile de mai sus depuse la diferitele date indicate în tabelul anexat, după deliberare, hotărăște după cum urmează: FACTE ȘI PROCURE Lista reclamanților este stabilită în anexa.
Având în vedere comportamentul procedural similar al reclamantelor, Curtea consideră că este oportun să examineze cererile în comun într-o singură decizie. Curtea observă că toate mijloacele disponibile de a contacta reclamanții au fost încercate fără succes. Având în vedere cele de mai sus, Curtea concluzionează că reclamanții pot fi considerați ca nu mai dorind să continue cererile (art. 37 § 1 (a) din Convenție). În plus, în conformitate cu art. 37 § 1 in fine , Curtea nu găsește circumstanțe speciale în ceea ce privește respectarea drepturilor omului, astfel cum sunt definite în Convenție și protocoalele sale, care necesită continuarea examinării cererilor (vezi Bryska și alții împotriva Ucrainei [Comitetul] (ovy.), nr. 11706/13 și 5 și alții, 23 noiembrie 2023). Curtea reiterează, totuși, că în temeiul articolului 37 § 2 din Convenție, poate decide să reinstaleze o cerere de decizie în cazul în care consideră că nu există o listă de astfel de cazuri. În vederea încheierii unei astfel de cereri, Curtea a decis în unanimitate, în temeiul Legii nr. 12/1971/2003, că nu este necesar să se alăture unei liste de astfel de cazuri. În vederea încheierii unei astfel de cereri, în mod scris, în temeiul Legii nr. 12/1971/2004, Președintele A. 12/1980 a Parlamentului, înlocuvând o lege de punere în aplicare, a unei greve, în vederea în care a fost notificată în mod unanim, în vederea încheierii de către Reprezentantul A.
Cazurile se referă în principal la plângerile reclamantelor în temeiul articolului 3 (presupusă tratament rău de către agenții statului și investigarea ineficientă a plângerilor relevante). Unele cazuri se referă, de asemenea, la alte plângeri în temeiul articolelor 3, 5, 6 și 13 din Convenție. Ultima scrisoare a reclamantului a fost primită la 16/01/2018. Procesarea cazului a fost amânată până la 07/06/2023 la cererea Guvernului pe motivul că dosarul intern se afla în teritoriile ocupate (regiunea Donetsk). După ce decizia de suspendare a fost ridicată și Guvernul a prezentat observații, reclamantul, a cărui ultimă adresă indicată era în regiunea Lviv, a fost invitat să își furnizeze observațiile în răspuns până la 18/04/2024.
(derularea) [GC], nr. 60125/11, §§ 35-41, 17 noiembrie 2016) . Având primit scrisoarea la 01/07/2024, avocatul reclamantului nu a răspuns. 3. 50470/14 02/07/2014 Viktor Ivanovich KOPYLOV 1973 4. 58420/14 15/08/2014 Aleksandr Nikolayevich CHORNYY 1970 5. 68055/14 12/10/2014 Vitaliy Vladimirovich CHERNYSHENKO 1974 Oleksandr Sergiyovych SHADRIN Ultima corespondență a fost primită la 19/12/2016. La 06/06/2024 avocatul reclamantului a fost rugat să indice Curții dacă era încă în contact cu reclamantul (care pare să aibă teritoriul controlat de Ucraina și al cărui loc de ședere nu este cunoscut de Belgia) și, în acest caz, avocatul lui Viktor Ivanovich KOPYLOV susținea încă cererea reclamantului. Avocatul a fost avertizat cu privire la posibilitatea unei trimiteri la judecata de la 30/07/2021 (Oleksandr Sergiyovich CHERNYSHENKO 1974 Oleksandr Sergiyovych SHADRIN 1974) și a fost informat că nu a primit nicio prelungire a termenului de executare a cererii sale de către avocatul lui Sergey MLOKYROV (Comunicantul pentru alte dosare) până la data de 26/07/20/2016 (începerea Hotărârea din 26/07/2020), iar reclamantul nu a primit nicio prelungire de timp pentru a datei de la 26/07/20/2018 (încăd.
La 06/06/2024, avocatul reclamantului a fost rugat să indice Curții dacă era încă în contact cu reclamanții (care par să fi părăsit teritoriul controlat de Ucraina și al căror loc de ședere nu este cunoscut de Curte) și, dacă da, dacă reclamanții susțineau încă cererile.Avocatul a fost avertizat cu privire la posibilitatea eliminării cu referire la hotărârea Curții în cazul V.M. și alții împotriva Belgiei (derogare) [GC], nr. 60125/11, §§ 35-41, 17 noiembrie 2016).La 26/07/2024 avocatul a informat Curtea că nu a putut stabili contact cu reclamanții.7.69387/14 15/10/2014 Dmitriy Petrovich SVIROVYOVY No. 6956/1067/15/14/2014 Dmitriy Volkovich Yechkovich PEKOLYENKOVY No. 6956/1067/15/14/2014 15.02.1984 9.02.1981 9.02.1981 9.02.1981 9.02.1981 9.02.1983 9.02.1989 9.02.1989 9.19203/202 9.192 9.192 9.192 9.192 9.192 9.192 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.193 9.1939.
Ultima corespondență din partea reclamantului a fost primită la 26/01/2022.La 31/07/2024 avocatul reclamantului a fost avertizat (prin eComms) că cazul poate fi șters, deoarece termenul limită pentru depunerea observațiilor în răspuns la cele ale Guvernului a expirat la 10/07/2024.
Application no. 23806/13
Volodymyr Stanislavovych SHCHUKIN against Ukraine
and 10 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 21
November 2024 as a Committee composed of:
Diana Sârcu
, President
,
Kateřina Šimáčková,
Mykola Gnatovskyy
, judges
,
and Viktoriya Maradudina,
Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.
The applicants’ complaints under various Articles of the Convention (see appended table) were communicated to the Ukrainian Government, which submitted observations on the admissibility and merits.
The applicants were required to submit their observations in reply, as well as their just satisfaction claims, however, the contact with the applicants has been lost (see appended table for details).
The Registry sent letters to the applicants indicating that Article
37
§
1
(a) of the Convention 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. In seven cases (see appended table for details) no response followed. In four cases (see appended table for details) the applicants’ lawyer informed the Court that he had lost contact with the applicants.
Having regard to the similar procedural conduct of the applicants, the Court finds it appropriate to examine the applications jointly in a single decision.
The Court notes that all the available means to contact the applicants have been tried without success. In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that the applicants may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue the applications (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 applications (see
Bryska and Others v. Ukraine
[Committee] (dec.), nos. 11706/13 and 5 others, 23 November 2023).
The Court, however, reiterates that under Article 37 § 2 of the Convention it may decide to restore an application to its list of cases if it considers that the circumstances justify such a course.
In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the cases out of the list.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides
to join the applications;
Decides
to strike the applications out of its list of cases.
Done in English and notified in writing on 12 December 2024.
Viktoriya Maradudina
Diana Sârcu
Acting Deputy Registrar
President
List of applications
No.
Application no.
Introduction date
Applicant
Year of Birth
Represented by
Main complaints raised
Reasons for a strike-out decision
1.
23806/13
29/01/2013
Volodymyr Stanislavovych SHCHUKIN
1971
The cases mainly concern the applicants’ complaints under Article 3 (alleged ill
‑
treatment by State agents and ineffective investigation of the relevant complaints). Some cases also concern other complaints under Articles 3, 5, 6 and 13 of the Convention.
Last letter from the applicant was received on 16/01/2018. The processing of the case was adjourned until 07/06/2023 at the Government’s request on the ground that the domestic file was in occupied territories (Donetsk Region). After the suspension decision had been lifted and the Government had provided observations, the applicant, whose last indicated address was in Lviv Region, was invited to provide his observations in response by 18/04/2024. As he did not reply to the Registry’s letter, on 22/05/2024 a letter with a strike-out warning was sent to him by registered mail.
On 20/06/2024 the letter was received by the applicant’s relative designated by him as his correspondence contact in his previous letter. No reply followed.
2.
48303/14
25/06/2014
Vladimir Vyacheslavovich MARETSKIY
1972
Yevgeniy Valeriyovych NADOLYA
Last correspondence from the applicants was received on 19/12/2016. On 06/06/2024 the applicants’ lawyer was requested to indicate to the Court whether he was still in contact with the applicants (who appear to have left the territory controlled by Ukraine and whose whereabouts are not known to the Court) and, if so, whether the applicants still supported the applications. The lawyer was warned of a striking-out possibility with reference to the Court’s judgment in the case of
V.M. and Others v. Belgium
(striking out) [GC], no.
60125/11, §§
35-41, 17
November
2016)
.
Having received the letter on 01/07/2024, the lawyer has not replied.
3.
50470/14
02/07/2014
Viktor Ivanovich KOPYLOV
1973
4.
58420/14
15/08/2014
Aleksandr Nikolayevich CHORNYY
1970
5.
68055/14
12/10/2014
Vitaliy Vladimirovich CHERNYSHENKO
1974
Oleksandr Sergiyovych SHADRIN
Last correspondence from the applicant was received on 19/12/2016. On 06/06/2024 the applicants’ lawyer was requested to indicate to the Court whether he was still in contact with the applicant (who appears to have left the territory controlled by Ukraine and whose whereabouts are not known to the Court) and, if so, whether the applicant still supported the application. The lawyer was warned of a striking-out possibility with reference to the Court’s judgment in the case of
V.M. and Others v. Belgium
(striking out) [GC], no.
60125/11, §§
35-41, 17
November
2016).
On 28/06/2024 the lawyer was granted his request for extension of the time-limit until 26/07/2024 in order to find the applicant. Following the letter informing the lawyer that the extension had been granted, which was downloaded by him on 30/06/2024 from the Court’s Electronic Communication Service (eComms), no further correspondence from the lawyer has been received.
6.
58077/14
11/08/2014
Sergey Gennadyevich GOCHAROV
1978
Mykhaylo Oleksandrovych TARAKHKALO
Last correspondence from the applicants was received on 19/12/2016. On 06/06/2024 the applicants’ lawyer was requested to indicate to the Court whether he was still in contact with the applicants (who appear to have left the territory controlled by Ukraine and whose whereabouts are not known to the Court) and, if so, whether the applicants still supported the applications. The lawyer was warned of a striking-out possibility with reference to the Court’s judgment in the case of
V.M. and Others v. Belgium
(striking out) [GC], no.
60125/11, §§
35-41, 17
November
2016).
On 26/07/2024 the lawyer informed the Court that he was unable to establish contact with the applicants.
7.
69387/14
15/10/2014
Dmitriy Petrovich SVIRIDOV
1974
8.
69567/14
15/10/2014
Yevgeniy Vasilyevich PECHEGIN
1981
9.
71350/14
27/10/2014
Valekh Ilyas Ogly BAYRAMOV
1969
10.
51996/17
05/07/2017
Leonid Mykolayovych VORONYUK
1959
Last correspondence from the applicant was received on 03/10/2022. On 22/05/2024 the applicant was informed, by way of a registered letter, that the period allowed for submission of his observations in reply to those of the Government had expired on 06/09/2023. He was warned that the case may be struck out in the event that he would not reply. On 15/06/2024 the letter was delivered to the applicant personally. No reply has ensued.
11.
53693/18
31/10/2018
Sergiy Volodymyrovych LYALIKOV
1961
Andriy Vyacheslavovych SHKOLYAR
Last correspondence from the applicant was received on 26/01/2022. On 31/07/2024 the applicant’s lawyer was warned (by eComms) that the case may be struck out, as the time-limit for filing observations in response to those of the Government had expired on 10/07/2024. This letter was downloaded by the applicant’s lawyer on 02/08/2024. No reply has ensued.