CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 19 janvier 2022

.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s2571CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:14pt } .s4B4B41EE { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt } .s16DC539 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; font-style:italic } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 7 February 2022   THIRD SECTION Application no. 13329/21 Marius MITT against Estonia lodged on 23 February 2021 communicated on 19 January 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns a strip search of the applicant who is serving his sentence in Viru Prison. The applicant was strip searched on 12 December 2019 after he had returned to prison from a doctor’s appointment outside the prison. After two male prison officers had removed all his clothes and the applicant had refused to perform the required squats due to health reasons, he was left sitting naked on a chair in the search room. Subsequently, while the applicant was naked, apparently three female prison officers and two female medical workers as well as one male medical worker entered the room for some period of time. Eventually the applicant performed the squats with the help of two male prison officers, he was allowed to get dressed and was taken to his cell. The applicant lodged a criminal complaint, but the authorities refused to initiate criminal proceedings. His appeals, focusing on the presence of several persons during the search, were dismissed. The applicant complains that the conduct of the strip search in the presence of several persons – including female prison officers and medical workers – and in a manner that included an obligation to squat despite his health condition violated his rights under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention?   2.     Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, considering the circumstances in which his strip search was carried out or has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention (see Roth v. Germany , nos. 6780/18 and 30776/18, §§ 70-72, 22 October 2020, where the Court referred, inter alia , to the specific manner of the inspection; Dejnek v. Poland , no. 9635/13, §§ 57-77 , 1 June 2017; and Jaeger v.   Estonia , no.   1574/13,§§ 41-49, 31 July 2014)?   The Government is asked to clarify the number and the professional roles of persons who were present during the time that the applicant was naked in the search room.