CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 10 mars 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 27 March 2023   FIRST SECTION Application no. 25063/20 Gianluca FANESI against Italy lodged on 19 June 2020 communicated on 10 March 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application   concerns the alleged ill-treatment   of the applicant by police officers and the lack of an effective investigation into the incident. On   5 November 2017, in the aftermath of a football match, the applicant was involved in a fight that broke out between supporters of the two opposing teams. The applicant alleges that he was struck in the head by an officer present at the scene and that this caused him serious physical injuries that led to permanent neurological damage. Relying on Article 3 of the Convention (substantive and procedural aspect), the applicant complains that the force used against him by the police had not been strictly necessary and that the   investigation   into his allegations had not been effective, as it had been characterised by a number of deficiencies and, amongst other things, had not led to the identification of those responsible for his injuries. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment at the hands of the police, in breach of the substantive limb of Article   3 of the Convention? In particular, was the force used in respect of the applicant strictly necessary   in the circumstances of the case (see Bouyid v.   Belgium   [GC], no.   23380/09, §§ 81-90 and §§ 100-101, ECHR 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 take all the reasonable measures available to them to secure evidence concerning the impugned events (see El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no. 39630/09, § 183, ECHR 2012)?   Can it be said that the domestic investigation’s conclusions were based on a thorough, objective and impartial analysis of all relevant elements? Are the decisions taken by the domestic authorities adequately reasoned and do they take into account the applicant’s submissions made to those authorities?   Was the applicant able to participate in the domestic investigation (see Bouyid , cited above, § 122)?