CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 21 janvier 2021

.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 } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sC83B07C { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s87BE5810 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:36pt; text-align:justify } .s120BFB92 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } Communicated on 21 January 2021 Published on 8 February 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 368/21 Andrea CIOTTA against Italy lodged on 5 January 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the continued detention in Regina Coeli prison (Rome) of an offender acquitted by reason of insanity and suffering from a severe psychiatric disorder, notwithstanding domestic courts’ decisions imposing his placement in a specialized structure, and expert reports underlying the incompatibility of detention with his state of mental health. The applicant complains of the unlawfulness of his prolonged detention; of the conditions of his detention, inadequate for his mental health in the absence of specific treatment for his psychiatric issues; of the absence of domestic remedies and of non-enforcement of domestic courts’ decisions ordering his placement outside prison. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES   1.     Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights under Article 3 of the Convention? In particular:   (a)     Did the applicant receive an adequate medical treatment during his detention in prison (see Strazimiri v. Albania , no.   34602/16, §§ 103-112, 21   January 2020)?   (b)     Were the applicant’s conditions of detention in conformity with the applicant’s state of health, and with the decisions issued by the Rome tribunal on 10 and 30 July 2020 in proceedings no.   56987/19 RGNR, concerning the applicant’s placement in a REMS?   2.     Has there been a breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In   particular, was the applicant’s continued detention “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention?   3.     Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as of the implementation of the decisions issued by the Rome tribunal on 10 and 30   July 2020 in proceedings no. 56987/19 RGNR?   4.     Was there an available remedy for the purposes of Article 13 of the Convention, for the applicant to complain of the alleged violations of Articles 3 and 5 § 1?   5.     Did the applicant have an effective compensatory remedy in respect of his complaint under Article 5 § 5 of the Convention?   6.     Having regard to the applicant’s situation in the instant case, as well as to other pending cases concerning the same issues, is that situation indicative of an underlying systemic problem or a structural deficiency regarding the availability of places in “REMS” facilities ( Residences for the Execution of Security Measures ), which calls for indication of general measures under Article   46 of the Convention, as interpreted in the light of Article 1 of the Convention?   The Government are invited to provide updated data on the number of persons awaiting placement in a REMS and the number of persons held in prison facilities while waiting for placement.