FIFTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 5712/04
by Andrey Ivanovich BURLACHENKO
against Ukraine
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 25 November 2008 as a Chamber composed of:
	Rait Maruste, President,
	Volodymyr Butkevych,
	Renate Jaeger,
	Mark Villiger,
	Isabelle Berro-Lefèvre,
	Mirjana Lazarova Trajkovska,
	Zdravka Kalaydjieva, judges,
and ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 27 December 2003,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Andrey Ivanovich Burlachenko, is a Ukrainian national who was born in 1977 and lived in the Odessa Region. The Ukrainian Government (“the Government”) are represented by their Agent, Mr Yuriy Zaytsev.
1.  Criminal proceedings against the applicant
On 10 April 2001 the Ovidiopol Prosecutor’s Office instituted criminal proceedings against the applicant on suspicion of tax evasion.
During the periods of 11 April to 23 April 2001 and of 10 August to 10 November 2004 the applicant was placed in detention in the Ovidiopol Pre-trial Detention Centre.
On 10 November 2004 the Kyivskyy District Court of Odessa ordered the applicant’s release and obliged him not to leave his permanent place of residence.
On 3 April 2008 the court suspended the criminal proceedings on the ground that the applicant absconded and his name was placed in the list of wanted persons.
2.  Non-enforcement of the judgment given in the applicant’s favour
On 7 November 2001 the Odessa Commercial Court ordered the Ovidiopol Tax Inspection and the State Treasury to pay the applicant 20,269 Ukrainian hryvnas (UAH) in compensation and court fees.
On 27 February 2003 the applicant received UAH 269, the remainder of the judgment remaining unenforced.
COMPLAINTS
The applicant complained under Articles 3 and 5 of the Convention about the unlawfulness and poor conditions of his detention in April 2001. He further complained under Articles 6 § 1 and 13 of the Convention about the excessive length of the criminal proceedings against him. He also complained under the same provisions about the non-enforcement of the judgment of 7 November 2001. Finally, he complained under Article 9 of the Convention that he had not been allowed to celebrate Easter during the latter period.
THE LAW
Notice of the application was given to the Government, who submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the case on 9 April 2008.
By letter of 25 April 2008 the applicant was invited to submit his observations in reply together with any claims for just satisfaction by 9 June 2008. However, the applicant failed to do so. Moreover, he failed to respond to a registered letter dated 2 July 2008, warning the applicant of the possibility that his case might be struck out of the Court’s list.
Having regard to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, the Court concludes that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. 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 this application to be continued.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
	Claudia Westerdiek	Rait Maruste
	Registrar	President