CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 janvier 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s3E839E41 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:30pt; text-align:center } .sDA30A789 { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s401C450A { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7EE1C8F0 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s11869A80 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s684F2214 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s25BD2B45 { margin-top:24pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s984A15CA { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s4070A5A6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:24pt; text-align:center; page-break-after:avoid } .sCDABDDB1 { margin-top:24pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } FIFTH SECTION Application no. 63253/09 A.G. against Ukraine lodged on 25 November 2009 STATEMENT OF FACTS THE FACTS The applicant is a Ukrainian national and was born in 1983. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On the evening of 12 May 2009 the applicant and some friends spent time in a local bar drinking some alcohol. Later on the applicant and two of his friends went out for a walk. In the park the applicant was attacked by an unknown person who hit him on the head. The applicant sustained an open traumatic brain injury and lost consciousness. That night the applicant was taken to hospital for treatment and the police were informed of the incident. On 9 July 2009 the police carried out an inspection of the scene of the incident. On 15 July 2009 they referred the applicant for a medical assessment and on 22 July 2009 the expert issued a report stating that the applicant’s injury was grave and life threatening. Despite the applicant’s complaints, the police refused to institute criminal proceedings. In particular, on 22 May, 18 July, 16 August, 18   September, 6 October, 10 November, and 12 December 2009 the police refused to open an investigation into the incident. Those decisions were quashed by the supervising authorities as unfounded and instructions were given as to the measures that should have been taken in the case (including questioning the victim and other people who were near him that night, collecting material and medical evidence, and an additional inspection of the crime scene). The additional measures ordered turned out to be unsuccessful due to the lapse of time. B.     Relevant domestic law Code of Criminal Procedure of 28 December 1960 Article 4 of the Code provides that a court, prosecutor, investigator or body of inquiry must, to the extent that it is within their power to do so, institute criminal proceedings in every case where signs of a crime have been discovered, take all necessary measures provided by law to establish whether a crime has been committed, and identify the perpetrators and punish them. Under Article 28 of the Code, a person who has sustained damage as a result of a crime can lodge a civil claim against an accused at any stage of criminal proceedings before the beginning of the consideration of the case on the merits by a court. A civil claimant within criminal proceedings is exempt from the court fee for lodging a civil claim. COMPLAINTS 1.     The applicant complains under Articles 2 and 3 of the Convention that the authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation of the circumstances in which he sustained a life-threatening injury. 2.     The applicant complains under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention that the ineffective conduct of the proceedings in question prevented him from obtaining compensation. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Is Article 2 of the Convention applicable to the present case? If so, was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 2 of the Convention?   2.     Has the State complied with its positive obligations under Article 3 of the Convention in the present case?   3.     Was Article 6 § 1 of the Convention applicable to the present case? If so, did the applicant have access to a civil remedy in respect of his claim for compensation on account of the alleged life-threatening attack, as required by Article 6 § 1 of the Convention?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal effective domestic remedies for his complaints under Articles 2 and 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?   The Government are invited to provide a chronological list of procedural measures taken in respect of the applicant’s complaints under Articles 2 and   3 of the Convention and copies of relevant documents.