FIRST SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 39887/02 by Aleksandr Yuryevich STEPANOV against Russia

The European Court of Human Rights ( First Section), sitting on 10 July 2007 as a Chamber composed of:

Mr C.L. Rozakis, President , Mr L. Loucaides, Mrs N. Vajić, Mr A. Kovler, Mrs E. Steiner, Mr K. Hajiyev, Mr D. Spielmann, j udges ,

and Mr S. Nielsen , Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 9 September 2002,

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

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

THE FACTS

The applicant, Mr Aleksandr Yuryevich Stepanov, was a Russian national who was born in 1959 and lived in Irkutsk . The respondent Government were represented by Mr P. Laptev, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.

The facts of the case may be summarised as follows.

On 23 April 1999 the applicant was detained on remand on suspicion of robbery.

On 5 September 2000 the Sverdlovskiy District Court of Irkutsk convicted t he applicant of theft and repeated concerted armed robbery and sentenced him to seven years and three months ’ imprisonment.

On 6 March 2001 the Irkutsk Regional Court upheld the judgment on appeal.

The applicant later requested the Prosecutor to initiate supervisory review of the judgment. On an unspecified date the Prosecutor lodged an application for supervisory review. The applicant was not informed about it and was not summoned to the hearing.

On 3 June 2002 the Presidium of the Irkutsk Regional Court reviewed the case under the supervisory review procedure. It excluded the “concert” as an aggravating circumstance of the offence of which the applicant was found guilty and reduced the sentence to six years and three months ’ imprisonment.

The application was communicated to the respondent Government on 29 August 2006 who submitted their observations on 28 November 2006.

The applicant was invited to submit his observations in reply by 2 February 2007. As no reply came by the indicated date, on 26 April 2007 he was informed, by registered post, that the Court might decide to strike the application out of the list of cases. This letter was returned to the Court marked “deceased”. No communication has been received by or on behalf of the applicant since. In particular no interested party has indicated a wish to pursue the application on his behalf.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complained under Article 5 of the Convention alleging that his pre-trial detention was unlawful.

The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention that he was not informed about the supervisory review, was not provided with a copy of the Prosecutor ’ s application and was not summoned to participate in the supervisory review hearing in breach of the principles of equality of arms and of adversarial nature of the proceedings. He also complained about the outcome of the supervisory review proceedings invoking Articles 6, 13 and 14 of the Convention and Article 2 § 1 of Protocol No. 7.

THE LAW

The Court notes that the applicant has died and that no heir has requested permission to pursue the application. In the circumstances it finds that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (c) 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 examination of the application to be continued.

In view of the above, it is appropriate to discontinue the application of Article 29 § 3 of the Convention and to strike the application out of the list of cases.

For these reasons, the Court unanimously

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

Søren Nielsen Christos Rozakis Registrar President