by Toita Khasanovna SHAMSAYEVA
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 3 December 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
Sverre Erik Jebens,
Giorgio Malinverni, judges,
and Søren Nielsen, Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 10 June 2009,
Having regard to the decision to grant priority to the above application under Rule 41 of the Rules of Court,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
The applicant, Ms Toita Khasanovna Shamsayeva, is a Russian national who was born in 1966 and lives in the village of Gekhi, the Urus-Martan District, in the Chechen Republic. She is represented before the Court by lawyers of the Memorial Human Rights Centre, an NGO registered in Moscow. The Russian Government (“the Government”) are represented by Mr G. Matyushkin, Representative of the Russian Federation at the European Court of Human Rights.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
At about 3 a.m. on 25 May 2009 around ten armed men in camouflage uniforms and masks arrived at the applicant’s house in three UAZ vehicles, including an all-terrain vehicle, and a silver colour VAZ-2110. They entered the house, demanded that her son, Apti Shamsayev, produce his identity papers and then took the young man away. The applicant inferred that those men were State agents.
On 3 June 2009 an investigation into Apti Shamsayev’s abduction was opened under Article 126 § 2 (a) of the Russian Criminal Code (aggravated kidnapping). The case was assigned the number 73025.
On 16 July 2009 Apti Shamsayev returned home. He explained that he had been detained by masked men who had not identified themselves and had not told him where he had been kept. The masked men had demanded that Apti Shamsayev confess that he had assisted illegal armed groups fighting against State agencies in the Chechen Republic.
The applicant complained under Article 5 of the Convention that her son had been kept in unlawful detention by State agents and under Article 13 of the Convention that she had no effective domestic remedies in this respect.
On 3 August 2009 the applicant’s representatives informed the Court that the applicant wanted to withdraw the application for the reason that Apti Shamsayev firmly objected to examination of the present case by the Court and that the applicant was unwilling to have her complaints examined.
The Court considers that, in these circumstances, the applicant may be regarded as no longer wishing to pursue her 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.
Søren Nielsen Nina Vajić