SECOND SECTION
FINAL DECISION
Application no. 18619/06
by Oleg KOMAROV
against Georgia
The European Court of Human Rights (Second Section), sitting on 
7 July 2009 as a Chamber composed of:
and Françoise Elens-Passos, ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 4 May 2006,
Having regard to the Government’s observations and their letter of 19 January 2009,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicant, Mr Oleg Komarov, is a Georgian national who was born in 1977 and lives in Zugdidi. He was represented before the Court by Mr Irakli Chikvaidze, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi. The Georgian Government (“the Government”) were successively represented by their Agents, Mr David Tomadze and Mr Levan Meskhoradze of the Ministry of Justice.
The case mostly concerned the fairness of the criminal proceedings which had led to the applicant’s conviction, on 11 July 2005, for kidnapping, extortion of money under threats of violence and unlawful possession of firearms.
On 17 January 2008 notice of the complaints under Article 6 §§ 1 and 3 of the Convention concerning the use of unlawfully obtained evidence against the applicant and his alleged inability to confront the victim was given to the Government; the applicant’s representative was duly informed on the same day.
By a letter dated 30 June 2008, dispatched by registered rapid post, the Government’s observations of 7 May 2008 were transmitted to the applicant’s representative, Mr Chikvaidze, who was requested to submit any observations together with any claims for just satisfaction in reply by 10 September 2008. No response followed.
In a letter of 19 January 2009, the Government informed the Court that, by virtue of a Presidential pardon, the applicant had been released from serving his prison sentence.
By a letter dated 17 February 2009, sent by fax and regular post, the applicant’s representative was requested to inform the Court by 17 March 2009 at the latest whether, in the light of his early release, the applicant still wished to maintain his application. As confirmed by a facsimile transmission record, the recipient’s fax machine successfully accepted the Court’s above-mentioned letter on 18 February 2009, at 9:43 a.m., Strasbourg time; the indicated fax number had often been used in communications with Mr Chikvaidze in the past. However, no response has been received from him to date.
THE LAW
In view of the absence of the applicant’s reply either to the Government’s observations or to the Court’s letter of 17 February 2009, the Court considers that he no longer wishes to pursue his application, within the meaning of Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention. Furthermore, in accordance with Article 37 § 1 , the Court finds no special circumstances regarding respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and its Protocols which require the further examination of the application.
For these reasons, the Court unanimously
Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases.
	Françoise Elens-Passos	 Françoise Tulkens
	Deputy Registrar	President