CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 mars 2015

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sA637C022 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left }     Communicated on 27 March 2015   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 1634/12 Rita ĀPŠA against Latvia lodged on 14 December 2011 STATEMENT OF FACTS 1.     The applicant, Ms Rita Āpša, is a Latvian national, who was born in 1968 and lives in Valka. 2.     The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. A.     The applicant’s conviction and imprisonment 3.     On 13 August 2008 the applicant was arrested on suspicion of narcotics-related offences. On 6 October 2008 she was released. 4.     On 6 April 2009 the applicant was convicted of two narcotics-related charges and sentenced to five years and six months’ imprisonment. 5.     On 19 January 2010 the applicant’s conviction was upheld on appeal. She was detained on 9 April 2010 and transferred to Iļģuciema Prison. 6.     On 23 March 2010 the application’s appeal on points of law was rejected. 7.     On 15 July 2013 she was transferred from Iļģuciema Prison to Olaine Prison. 8.     On 3 June 2014 the applicant was released on parole. B.     The death of the applicant’s mother and her funeral 9.     On 8 July 2011 the applicant’s mother died. Her brother informed the prison authorities about this fact. He also offered to cover any expenses in relation to the applicant’s convoy to the funeral should that be required. According to the applicant, her brother’s request was refused because it was a Friday. The prison authorities did not inform the applicant about the death of her mother until later (see below). 10.     On 11 July 2011 the funeral took place. The prison authorities informed the applicant about it only on the next day – on 12 July 2011. COMPLAINT The applicant complains in substance under Article 8 of the Convention that she was not granted leave from prison to attend her mother’s funeral.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the refusal to allow the applicant to attend her mother’s funeral compatible with her right to respect for private and family life guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention?