CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 25 novembre 2021

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF920FE69 { font-family:Arial; color:#f8f8f8 } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s241E80BF { width:7.44pt; display:inline-block } .s3DF5EF88 { width:128.75pt; display:inline-block } .sC30055DD { width:0.44pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s6186A45 { width:104.38%; border-collapse:collapse } .s24DA8339 { width:6.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s4B826F12 { width:55.88%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sB3DA45E9 { width:37.66%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sEF7374D2 { width:6.46%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sA7CF2237 { width:55.88%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s512407D3 { width:37.66%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   THIRD SECTION DECISION Application no. 30112/08 Rustem Rafaelevich VALIULLIN and ASSOCIATION OF MOSQUES OF RUSSIA against Russia The European Court of Human Rights (Third Section), sitting on 25   November 2021 as a Committee composed of:   Peeter Roosma, President,   Dmitry Dedov,   Andreas Zünd, judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above application lodged on 7   February 2008, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of the applicants is set out in the appendix. The applicants’ complaints under Articles 9, 10 and 13 of the Convention of a violation of their right to freedom of religion and expression and the absence of an effective remedy were communicated to the Russian Government who submitted on 12 July 2011 their observations on the admissibility and merits. These observations were forwarded to the applicants who submitted their observations and claims for just satisfaction in reply on 9 September 2011. It became known to the Court that the first applicant, who was also the representative of the second applicant organisation, had died in or around 2012. On 15 September 2021 the Registry sent a letter to the second applicant by registered post to inquire whether any heirs of the first applicant wished to continue the proceedings in his stead and to invite the applicant organisation to appoint a new representative. The applicant organisation’s attention was drawn to Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention, which provides that the Court may strike an application out of its list of cases where the circumstances lead to the conclusion that the applicant does not intend to pursue the application. The applicant organisation received this letter on 1 October 2021. However, no response has been followed. THE LAW In the light of the foregoing, the Court concludes that neither the first applicant’s heirs nor the applicant organisation wish to pursue the application within the meaning of Article   37   §   1   (a) of the Convention. Accordingly, the case should be struck out of the list. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases. Done in English and notified in writing on 16 December 2021.   {signature_p_2}   Viktoriya Maradudina   Peeter Roosma   Acting Deputy Registrar   President APPENDIX List of applicants   No. Applicant’s Name Year of birth / registration 1. Rustem Rafaelevich VALIULLIN 1975 2. THE ASSOCIATION OF MOSQUES OF RUSSIA N/A