16. Between June 2007 and 31 May 2012, the Secretariat sent more than five letters reminding the parties, in particular the Complainant, to submit arguments on the merits in order to enable the Respondent State to prepare its submission on the merits of the communication. 17. The parties were also informed of the Commission's decision to defer its consideration of the communication due to the lack of the Complainant's submissions on the merits. 18. By a letter dated 31 May 2012 addressed to the Complainant, the Secretariat reiterated its previous requests and notified him that should he fail to submit a response by 31 July 2012, the Commission would be obliged to take an appropriate decision. 19. Given the long and unjustified lack of response on the part of the Complainant, the Commission decided to take a decision on the matter. Analysis of the Commission 20. Rule 108 (1) of the Rules of Procedure of the Commission stipulates that once a communication has been declared admissible, the Commission shall set a period of sixty (60) days for the Complainant to submit observations on the merits. 21. Rule 113 of the same Rules stipulates that when a deadline is fixed for a particular submission, either party may apply to the Commission for extension of the period stipulated. The Commission may grant an extension which shall not exceed one (1) month. 22. To date, the Complainant has not submitted his observations on the merits and has not replied to the Commission's requests to submit on the merits of the communication, including the one sent to him by the Secretariat on 31 May 2012. He has also not requested an extension of the deadline to submit his observations. Decision of the Commission 23. In view of the foregoing, the Commission finds that there is a lack of interest on the part of the Complainant and decides to strike out the Communication for lack of diligent prosecution. Done at the 52nd Ordinary Session of the Commission held from 9 to 22 October 2012 in Yamoussoukro, Côte d'Ivoire. 2