FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 48881/07 by Zbigniew SIUDA against Poland

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 25 January 2011 as a Chamber composed of:

Nicolas Bratza , President, Lech Garlicki , Ljiljana Mijović , Ján Šikuta , Mihai Poalelungi , Nebojša Vučinić , Vincent A. de Gaetano , judges, and Lawrence Early , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 29 October 2007,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The application was lodged by Mr Zbigniew Siuda, a Polish national who was born in 1973 and lives in Ru da. The Polish Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mr J. Wołąsiewicz of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The applicant ’ s complaint concerning the lack of independence of an assessor (junior judge) was communicated to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits. The observations were forwarded to the applicant, who was invited to submit his own observations. The applicant informed the Registry that he could not find a lawyer willing to represent him.

By letter of 24 June 2010 the applicant was notified that the President of the Section ha d extended to 30 July 2010 the time allowed for submission of his observations. No reply was received to that letter.

By letter dated 16 November 2010, sent by registered post, the applicant was notified that the extended period allowed for submission of his observations had expired on 30 July 2010 and that no extension of time had been requested. The applicant ’ s attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike a case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The advice of receipt was returned to the Court indicating that the applicant was released from Rzeszów Prison where he had served his prison sentence. A similar letter was sent to the applicant ’ s home a ddress by registered post on 10 Decemb er 2010. However, no response has been received.

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.

Lawrence Early Nicolas Bratza Registrar President