CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 13 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 } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt }   Communicated on 13 July 2017   FIRST SECTION Application no. 173/17 X and Y against the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia lodged on 19 December 2016 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the allegedly inhuman treatment of the applicants, who are of Roma origin and were minors at the time, by members of “Alfa” special mobile police unit and the domestic authorities’ failure to conduct a prompt and effective investigation into their allegations of racially motivated police brutality. The acts complained of occurred in public (and at a police station with respect to Mr X.), in the presence of eye-witnesses, when four police officers intercepted the applicants as they matched the profile of assailants involved in an incident reported previously. The next day Mr X. was diagnosed with bruises on his head, neck and chest. The applicants allege that the public prosecutor took no action with respect to their criminal complaint of 3 September 2014 accusing four unidentified police officers of ill-treatment and violence motivated by racial prejudice.     QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.   Were the applicants subjected to treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention as a result of the authorities’ acts, in particular slaps, punches, truncheon blows and kicks allegedly inflicted on them by the police officers on 19   May 2014?   2.     Given the applicants’ Roma origin, did the treatment complained of demonstrate discrimination on the part of the State agents and was, in consequence, in violation of Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 3 of the Convention, or of Article 1 of Protocol No.12?   3.     Did the authorities conduct an effective investigation into the applicants’ allegations, as required under the procedural head of Article 3 of the Convention? Have the authorities failed in their duty to investigate possible racist motives for the acts complained of, in violation of Article 14 taken in conjunction with Article 3 in its procedural aspect, or of Article 1 of Protocol No. 12?   4. As regards the allegations of discrimination, have the applicants exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, can a compensation claim under the Prohibition of Discrimination Act and/or a constitutional complaint before the Constitutional Court be regarded as an effective remedy within the meaning of this provision in respect of the applicants’ complaints under Article 14 and Article 1 of Protocol No. 12?