CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 mai 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 } .s5FFF0A75 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:7pt } .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 } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; 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 23 May 2022   SECOND SECTION Application no. 47751/21 Dmitri GAIDARJI against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 10 September 2021 communicated on 3 May 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s detention in inhuman and degrading conditions. The applicant describes the conditions of detention in the detention facility of the Taraclia police station, in which he was held for approximately six years pending trial, as follows: the toilet was separated from the rest of the cell only by a wall with no door and he had to satisfy his natural needs in front of his cellmates; the cell was dirty, with high humidity and mold; the window was almost completely blocked by dirt so that natural light was virtually absent; a heavy stench was in the air. His complaint under a new preventive and compensatory remedy aimed at compensating for inhuman conditions of detention was rejected since the relevant provisions did not apply to preventive detention at police stations. The applicant complains of a violation of Article 3 because he was held in inhuman conditions of detention.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention in view of the allegedly inhuman and degrading conditions of the applicant’s detention? ( Shișhanov v. The Republic of Moldova , no.   11353/06, §§ 57-60, 15   September 2015 )   2.     Has there been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention because of the lack of effective remedies in respect of complaints about inhuman and degrading conditions of detention for persons detained in detention facilities within police stations?