CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 8 mars 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 29 March 2021   SECOND SECTION Application no. 38016/18 Denis GRÎU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 2 August 2018 communicated on 8 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s remand in custody pending trial for two and a half months on charges of attempted undue influence on a witness in a criminal case, allegedly in the absence of relevant and sufficient reasons for detention. The applicant complains under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention that his pre-trial detention was not based on relevant and sufficient reasons. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the applicant’s deprivation of liberty based on relevant and sufficient reasons as required under Article 5 § 3 of the Convention ( Buzadji v. the Republic of Moldova [GC], no. 23755/07, §§ 115-123, 5 July 2016)?   The Government are requested to submit a full copy of the case-file in the domestic proceedings.