CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 22 août 2016

.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 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 22 August 2016   FIRST SECTION Application no. 38067/15 L.R. against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia lodged on 27 July 2015 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant is a Macedonian national. The application has been submitted on behalf of the applicant by the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights (the HCHR) in Skopje, represented by its chairman, Mr G. Kajaldžiev. COMPLAINTS The HCHR, acting on behalf of the applicant, complains that he was subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention. In that connection, the HCHR maintains that he was wrongly diagnosed as early as 2008, which led to his being placed in an inappropriate institution where he did not receive adequate care and treatment and which culminated in his being tied to his bed. A lack of action by the applicant’s statutory guardian led to his neglect. Furthermore, the HCHR complains that the investigation of its allegations of inhuman and degrading treatment was ineffective. Lastly, the HCHR complains that the applicant did not have an effective remedy in relation to his complaints under Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article 13.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES   1.     In accordance with Article 34 of the Convention, does the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Skopje have locus standi to lodge the present application on behalf of the applicant?   2.     Have all effective domestic remedies been exhausted, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   3.     In view of the applicant’s disabilities, can it be said that his placement and treatment in the RIBBS constituted treatment incompatible with Article 3 of the Convention? The Government are invited to provide detailed information about the treatment to which the applicant was subjected at the RIBBS, in particular about his being tied to the bed in his room.   4.     Having regard to the procedural aspect of Article 3 of the Convention, did the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities comply with the requirements of this provision (see Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, §   131, ECHR 2000-IV)? The Government are invited to provide information and relevant documents as to the outcome of the disciplinary proceedings allegedly launched against the relevant staff of the SWCB and the RIBBS.   5.     Was there an effective domestic remedy in this case in respect of the complaints under Article 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?