FIFTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 74277/01 by Aleksandr Mikhaylovich TRASPOV against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 11 December 2007 as a Chamber composed of:

Mr P. Lorenzen , President, Mrs S. Botoucharova , Mr K. Jungwiert , Mr V. Butkevych , Mrs M. Tsatsa-Nikolovska , Mr R. Maruste , Mr A. Kovler , judges, and Mrs C. Westerdiek , Section Registrar

Having regard to the above application lodged on 18 December 2000,

Having regard to the decision to apply Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and examine the admissibility and merits of the case together,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Aleksa ndr Mikhaylovich Traspov , is a Russian national who was born in 1956 and lives in city of Stavropol . The Russian Government (“the Government”) were initially represented by Mr P. Laptev, the former Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights, and subsequently by their new Representative, Mrs V. Milinchuk .

The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.

On 27 September 1999 the applicant requested the local electoral commission to register him as a candidate for the elections to the State Duma, the lower chamber of the Russian Parliament.

The commission dismissed his application, considering that he had been involved in illegal campaigning.

On 17 December 1999 the Stavropol Regional Court upheld that decision.

On 19 December 1999 the elections took place. The applicant ’ s name was not listed in the ballot papers.

On 1 February 2000 the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation upheld the judgment of 17 December 1999.

On 24 May 2000 the Presidium of the Supreme Court set aside the above judgments and remitted the case to the Regional Court .

By judgment of 4 July 2000, the Regional Court annulled the refusal to register the applicant as a candidate for the elections.

Subsequently, the applicant unsuccessfully sought annulment of the voting results, referring, in particular, to the judgment of 4 July 2000.

On 15 September 2000 the Regional Court dismissed the complaint. On 21 November 2000 the Supreme Court upheld the judgment.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complained under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention about the courts ’ refusal to annul the results of the elections.

THE LAW

On 4 December 2006 the Court communicated the application to the respondent Government under Rule 54 § 2 (b) of the Rules of Court.

The Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the case on 18 April 2007. By letter of 25 April 2007, the Court requested the applicant to submit, by 26 June 2007, his comments on the Government ’ s observations.

As the applicant had not replied, by letter of 11 September 2007, sent by registered mail, the Court drew his attention to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention which provides that the Court can strike the case out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that an applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicant did not reply. The letter of 11 September 2007 was returned to the Court with the mention “moved out”.

The Court notes that on 25 April 2007 the applicant was informed that notice of the application had been given to the respondent Government. No response had been received to date and the applicant did not inform the Court of his new address. With reference to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention , th e Court considers, in these circumstances, that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application and that the case should be struck out of the list. The Court finds no particular reasons concerning respect for human rights, as defined in the Convention and its Protocols, which would require further examination of the present application ( Article 37 § 1 in fine of the Convention).

Accordingly, Article 29 § 3 should no longer apply to the case and it should be struck out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.

Claudia Westerdiek P eer Lorenzen Registrar President