CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 mai 2019

.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 16 May 2019   SECOND SECTION Application no. 7336/11 Aliona NEGRU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 15 December 2010 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the fact of declaring the applicant an internationally wanted person, but refusing to give her any details concerning the charges against her, as well the absence of effective remedies in that respect. It raises issues under Articles 8 and 13 of the Convention. QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES 1.     Do the facts of the case disclose a violation of Article 8 of the Convention? In particular, was data about the applicant’s wanted status made public and were there legal safeguards against abuse concerning the recording, storing and release of such information (see, mutatis mutandis , Shimovolos v. Russia , no. 30194/09, § 66, 21 June 2011)?   2.     Did the applicant have at her disposal effective remedies, within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention, in respect of her complaint under Article 8? In particular, was there a procedure by which she could challenge her inclusion into the list of wanted persons?