FIRST SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 12322/07
by Mihai JACOB and Carmen-Elena COŞOREANU
against Greece
The European Court of Human Rights (First Section), sitting on 9 February 2010 as a Chamber composed of:
and ,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 March 2007,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
THE FACTS
The applicants, Mr Mihai Jacob and Mrs Carmen-Elena Coşoreanu, are Romanian nationals who were born in 1962 and 1967 respectively and live in Romania. The respondent Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent's delegates, Mr K. Georgiadis, Adviser at the State Legal Council, and Mrs Z. Chatzipavlou, Legal Assistant at the State Legal Council. The Romanian Government, who were invited to submit written observations on the case, chose not to exercise that right (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 1 of the Rules of Court).
The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows.
On 13 July 2005 the applicants were arrested, together with other three Romanian citizens, for drug-related offences and remanded in custody. They were charged with drug-possession, drug trafficking and association to commit offences.
On 18 July 2005 the investigating judge at the Zakynthos Criminal Court remanded them in custody.
On 3 January 2006 the Public Prosecutor submitted to the Indictment Division of the Patras Criminal Court of Appeal his proposal to prolong the applicants' detention in compliance with Article 287 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, since the applicants had been in detention for six months.
On 12 January 2006 the Indictment Division of the Patras Criminal Court of Appeal ruled that the applicants' detention was prolonged for six months.
In June 2006 the Public Prosecutor submitted to the Indictment Division of the Zakynthos Criminal Court his proposal to further prolong the applicants' detention.
On 5 July 2006 the Indictment Division of the Zakynthos Criminal Court upheld the first applicant's detention on remand. It also replaced the second applicant's pre-trial detention by preventive measures, namely a prohibition from leaving the country and an obligation to report to her local police station twice a month (decision no. 61/2006).
On 3 November 2006 the Indictment Division of the Patras Criminal Court of Appeal ruled on the charges against the applicants. In particular, it committed the applicants for trial before the Patras Assize Court for drug-related offences, illegal possession of weapons and illegal entry into the Greek territory and it dropped the charges related to the organisation of a crime association. Furthermore, it decided to prolong the first applicant's detention on remand and the preventive measures imposed to the second applicant (decision no. 318/2006).
The first applicant remained in detention on remand until 21 December 2006, when the Patras Assize Court acquitted the applicants in respond of the drug related offences and the illegal possession of weapons (judgment no. 634/2006).
On an unspecified date the applicants were expelled from Greece.
COMPLAINTS
The applicants complained that during their arrest they had been ill-treated by police officers. They also complained that their detention had been unlawful and abusive. They further complained about the conditions of their detention. Finally, they complained about the prohibition of stay and the subsequent expulsion from the Greek territory.
THE LAW
On 23 January 2009 the President gave notice of the application to the respondent Government under Rule 54 § 2 (c) of the Rules of Court. The Government submitted their observations on the admissibility and merits of the case on 26 May 2009.
By letter of 8 June 2009 the applicants were requested to submit, by 20 July 2009, their comments on the Government's observations.
As the applicants had not replied, by letter of 17 August 2009, sent by registered mail, their attention was drawn to Article 37 § 1 (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court can strike a case out of its list where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that an applicant does not intend to pursue the application.
The Court notes that, despite the Court's letters of 8 June and 17 August 2009, the applicants have not submitted their observations in reply to those of the Government. Nor have they made any other submissions to the Court.
Against this background, the Court considers that the applicants have lost interest in pursuing their application. The Court finds no reasons concerning respect for human rights warranting the further 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 
	Registrar	President