CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 avril 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 } .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 } Published on 25 April 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 38963/18 V.I. against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 8 August 2018 communicated on 6 April 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s psychiatric internment, allegedly amounting to ill-treatment and the ineffective investigation into the allegations of ill-treatment. In particular, in 2014 the applicant, aged fifteen, was placed by his guardian, a local authority, in a psychiatric hospital. Upon completion of the treatment, the applicant spent two more months in the psychiatric ward because the guardianship authority did not arrange for his further placement. In the psychiatric ward the applicant was held in inadequate material conditions, a certain period of time in the adults’ ward, and was subject to medical restraint, neglect and violence from other residents (including possible sexual abuse). The criminal investigation on charges of ill-treatment was finally discontinued in 2018 on the ground that no harmful intent was discerned in the actions of the medical staff. The applicant complains of a violation of his rights under Article 3, 8, and 13 of the Convention as well as under Article 14 read in conjunction with his other complaints.   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Does the manner in which the authorities have handled their obligation to provide the applicant with care and treatment, in view of his particular medical and legal situation, constitute inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention or amount to a violation of Article 8 of the Convention? Was the decision-making process with respect to the applicant’s psychiatric internment and to the medical treatment received there in compliance with Article 3 and/or 8 of the Convention ? Was the applicant housed and treated in insalubrious conditions and subjected to various forms of violence or coercion, including from other residents of the psychiatric ward, in breach of Article 3 and/or 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v.   Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014, and B. v. Romania (no. 2) , no.   1285/03, 19 February 2013)?   2.     Having regard to the procedural protection under Article 3 and/or 8 of the Convention, did the authorities carry out an effective investigation into the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment and other forms of coercion and neglect (see, mutatis mutandis, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014, and B. v.   Romania (no. 2) , no. 1285/03, 19 February 2013)?   3.     Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of his Convention rights on the ground of his medical condition, contrary to Article   14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8?   4.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaints under Articles 3, 8 and 14, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?