CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 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 } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2F8352C2 { width:77.14%; margin-left:10.75pt; border-collapse:collapse } .s615CA4A2 { width:4.14%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s702E94CE { width:31.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sE3F84B33 { width:31.96%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s2220E92 { width:4.14%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB66E5582 { width:31.94%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sD9E05B4E { width:31.96%; border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } Published on 6 April 2021   SECOND SECTION Application no. 44394/15 G.M. and Others against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 2 September 2015 communicated on 19 March 2021 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged termination of the applicants’ pregnancies against their wishes, as well as forced sterilisation of one of them. The applicants are affected by medium-level mental development issues, but have not been officially deprived of their legal capacity. Two of them were raped by F.S., the head doctor of the psychiatric institution in which they were being treated. All three became pregnant. They all wanted to continue with their pregnancies, but the medical commission of the institution, which included F.S., decided to terminate their pregnancies, contrary to their wishes. In addition, the doctors installed an intrauterine contraceptive device into one of the applicants in order to prevent future pregnancies, again contrary to her wishes. After the various interventions made contrary to the applicants’ wishes, all three applicants could no longer procreate. The applicants complain under Article 8 of the Convention about forced interruption of their pregnancies, about threats of violence and use of sedatives, as well as an unconsented medical intervention aimed at preventing future pregnancies in respect of one of them. The case raises issues under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention (inhuman treatment and violation of personal integrity).   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Has there been a breach of Article 3 and/or 8 of the Convention? In particular, were the applicants subjected to forced termination of their pregnancies and, in respect of some of them, sterilisation (see, for instance, V.C. v. Slovakia , no. 18968/07, 8 November 2011 and G.B. and R.B. v.   Moldova , no. 16761/09, 18 December 2012)?     APPENDIX   No. Applicant’s Name Nationality Place of residence 1 G. M. Moldovan Balti 2 T. M. Moldovan Balti 3 M. P. Moldovan Balti