FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no . 55093/09 Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Malacu and Others against Romania

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 27 September 2016 as a Committee composed of:

Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque, President, Iulia Motoc, Marko Bošnjak, judges,

and Andrea Tamietti, Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 May 2009,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government on 8 April 2016 requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases and the applicants ’ representative reply to that declaration,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

1. A list of the applicants is set out in the appendix.

2. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms C. Brumar, from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

3. The Centre for Legal Resources (hereinafter “the CLR” ) complained on behalf of the applicants under Articles 2, 3, 13 and 14 of the Convention about the ill-treatment and discrimination the applicants suffered at the hands of the domestic authorities, the circumstances of their death while in the Poiana Mare Psychiatric Hospital and the lack of adequate official investigations thereof.

4. These complaints were communicated to the Government.

5. By letter dated 8 April 2016 the Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by the application. The declaration stated as follows:

“The Government acknowledge and regret the breach of Article 2 and Article 13 in conjunction with Article 2 of the Convention, that are at the origin of the present application, in respect of the applicants Miori ţ a Malacu, Maricica Barbu, Maria Be ş tea, Ioana Istrate and Dumitru Ticu.

The Government also acknowledge and regret the violation of Article 3 of the Convention, with respect to the living conditions and medical care in the Poiana Mare Hospital during the period 2003-2004.

The Government note that the measures adopted and envisaged in order to prevent such situations are evaluated by the Committee of Ministers in the context of its supervising the execution of the judgment in the case of Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania , (no. 47848/08, judgment of 17 July 2014).

This acknowledgment will constitute the final resolution of the case pending before the European Court of Human Rights.”

6. On 10 May 2016 the Court received a letter from the CLR stating that they had agreed to the terms of the Government ’ s unilateral declaration. In their letter, the CLR mentioned that “they agreed that the Court should strike out the present case out of its list of cases”.

THE LAW

7. Having regard to the complaints raised by the CLR on behalf of the applicants under Articles 2, 3 and 13 of the Convention, the Court finds that following the CLR ’ s express agreement to the terms of the declaration made by the Government, it should be assumed that a friendly settlement has been reached between the parties.

8. The Court takes note of this settlement in so far as it relates to the above complaints . It is satisfied that the settlement is based on respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols and finds no reasons to justify a continued examination of the application.

9. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list in so far as it relates to the above complaints.

10. Relying on Article 14 of the Convention , the CLR also complained on behalf of the applicants that they had suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of their Convention rights protected by Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention on the ground of their social and medical condition. This complaint is not covered by the Government ’ s unilateral declaration.

11. However, the Court notes that in their letter of 10 May 2016, the CLR expressly agreed with the striking out of the whole application.

12. The Court considers that, in the circumstances described above, the CLR may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue this complaint on behalf of the applicants, 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 this complaint.

13. In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike also this part of the application out of the list.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in so far as it relates to the complaints under Articles 2, 3 and 13 of the Convention pursuant to Article 39 of the Convention ;

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in so far as it relates to the complaint under Article 14 of the Convention pursuant to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention.

Done in English and notified in writing on 20 October 2016 .

Andrea Tamietti Paulo Pinto de Albuquerque              Deputy Registrar President

Appendix

The Centre for Legal Resources, a Romanian NGO based in Bucharest, filed the present application on behalf of all five applicants mentioned above.