CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 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   FIRST SECTION Application no. 49968/22 Luca ALEKSIC against Italy lodged on 25 October 2022 communicated on 24 January 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the detention from 21 February 2022 to 8   November 2022 in the Trento prison of the applicant, acquitted by reason of insanity and suffering from a psychiatric disorder, notwithstanding the decision of the Rovereto District Court of 7 July 2022 ordering his placement in a specialised structure (Residence for Execution of Security Measures – “REMS”). The applicant complains under Articles 3 and 5 § 1 of the Convention as well as Article 6 § 1 of the Convention of the unlawfulness of his prolonged detention, of the conditions of his detention deemed inadequate for his mental health in the absence of specific treatment and of the non-enforcement of the domestic court’s decision ordering his placement in a specialised structure. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights under Article 3 of the Convention (see Sy v. Italy , no. 11791/20, §§ 76-89, 24 January 2022)? In particular: (a)     in light of the applicant’s psychiatric disorder and of the decision issued by the Rovereto District Court on 7 July 2022 ordering his placement in a REMS, was the applicant’s detention in prison compatible with his state of health? (b)     did the applicant receive adequate medical treatment during his detention in prison (see Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no. 18052/11, §§146-47, 31 January 2019, and Strazimiri v. Albania , no. 34602/16, §§ 103-12, 21   January 2020)?   2.     Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicant’s continued detention from 7 July 2022 to 8 November 2022 “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see Sy , cited above, §§ 133-36)?   3.     Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as regards the implementation of the decision issued by the Rovereto District Court on 7 July 2022 (see Sy , cited above, § 153)?