CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 23 janvier 2023

.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 13 February 2023   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 40861/22 Deniss HANOVS against Latvia lodged on 17 August 2022 communicated on 23 January 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s complaint of a lack of an effective investigation by the domestic authorities in response to a homophobic act perpetrated by two private individuals against him. On 8 November 2020 the applicant was verbally and physically assaulted on the street. Criminal proceedings (no.   11089136620) were instituted for hooliganism and later for a hate crime. By a final decision of 5   May 2022 those proceedings were discontinued as no elements of crime were found. One of the perpetrators was subject to a fine of EUR 70 for petty hooliganism in connection with administrative-offence proceedings. The identity of the other perpetrator, although questioned by the police, was not established. The applicant relies on Article 3 taken alone and in conjunction with Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention. QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Have the State authorities complied with their positive obligations under Articles 3 and/or 8 of the Convention, taken alone and/or in conjunction with Articles 13 and 14 of the Convention, concerning the discriminatory (homophobic) attack against the applicant (see Beizaras and Levickas , no.   41288/15, §§   106-30, 149-56, 14 January 2020; Association ACCEPT and Others v. Romania , no. 19237/16, §§ 96-103 and 114-26, 1   June 2021; Sabalić v. Croatia , no. 50231/13, §§   90-101, 14   January 2021)?