CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 novembre 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 16 November 2020 Published on 7 December 2020   THIRD SECTION Application no. 43035/20 Anton Vladimirovich TKACHENKO against Russia lodged on 22 August 2020 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s placement in a psychiatric facility for involuntary treatment (Article 5 § 1 of the Convention). The placement was ordered by the Justice of the Peace of the 241st Court Circuit of the Nagatinskiy District of Moscow on 15 May 2019 with reference to the psychiatric assessment report of 24 October 2018. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Was the applicant deprived of his liberty in breach of Article   5 §   1 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicant’s placement in a psychiatric facility lawful given that the decision of 15 May 2019 referred to the findings of the psychiatric assessment report issued on 24 October 2018, i.e. almost six months prior to the order (see Ilnseher v.   Germany [GC], nos.   10211/12 and 27505/14, § 131, 4 December 2018, and Trutko v.   Russia , no. 40979/04, §§ 51-57, 6 December 2016)?