CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 juillet 2017

.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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }   Communicated on 12 July 2017   SECOND SECTION Application no 20546/16 Sergiu SECRIERU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 6 April 2016 SUBJECT MATTER OF the CASE The application concerns the applicant’s remand in custody for over six months in criminal proceedings in which he had been accused of defrauding a third person of a sum of some six hundred euros. The main reason given by the domestic court for placing him in custody was that he had allegedly absconded. However, the applicant claims that he was abroad and that he learned about the search warrant only upon his return to Moldova. He therefore argues that his detention was arbitrary and contrary to Article 5 §   1 of the Convention. He also submits that there were no relevant and sufficient grounds to order his remand in custody as required by Article 5 §   3 of the Convention. Finally he complains that throughout his detention he was detained in very poor conditions in Prison No. 13. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the applicant deprived of his liberty in breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicant’s detention “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” and devoid of arbitrariness?   2.     Was the applicant’s detention based on relevant and sufficient reasons, as required by Article 5 § 3 of the Convention (see Buzadji v.   the   Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, §§ 115-23, ECHR 2016 (extracts))?   3.     Did the material conditions of the applicant’s detention in Prison   No.   13 amount to inhuman or degrading treatment under Article 3 of the Convention (see Shishanov v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 11353/06, 15   September 2015)?