CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 mars 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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 11 April 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 40110/15 A.V. against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 6 August 2015 communicated on 24 March 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the ineffective investigation into the applicant’s daughter’s (A.) sexual assault and death, including the failure of authorities to keep her informed of the course of the investigation. On 2 November 2013 the applicant’s fifteen-year-old daughter was found dead after she had fallen from the nineteenth floor of a building. On the victim’s body were found traces of semen. An investigation into coercion or incitement to commit suicide was initiated but subsequently discontinued on the ground that A. was suffering from depression and had committed suicide. An investigation into sexual relations with a person under the age of sixteen was initiated on 29   December 2014 to be suspended two months later pending the identification of perpetrators. The applicant complains of a violation of her rights under Articles 2, 3, 8 and 13 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see paragraph   104 of Salman v.   Turkey [GC], no.   21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article   2 of the Convention? In particular, did the authorities carry out an effective investigation into the death of the applicant’s daughter and was the applicant’s right to be kept informed of the course of the investigation observed (see, Lari v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 37847/13, §§ 34-40, 15   September 2015)?   2.     Having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment (see paragraph   131 of Labita v.   Italy [GC], no.   26772/95, ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article   3 of the Convention? In particular, did the authorities carry out an effective investigation into the sexual assault against the applicant’s daughter shortly before her death (see, I.P. v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 33708/12, 28 April 2015; Y v. Bulgaria, no. 41990/18, §§ 80 ‑ 83, 20 February 2020; Z v. Bulgaria , no. 39257/17, §§ 64-70, 28 May 2020)?   The Government are asked to submit a copy of the full version of the case files, concerning the criminal investigation instituted by the Prosecutor’s Office in respect of the alleged suicide and sexual assault of A.