CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 octobre 2024

.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sD37F5C3B { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Published on 12 November 2024   FIRST SECTION Application no. 11238/24 Marco CELATO against Italy lodged on 3 April 2024 communicated on 24 October 2024 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the prolonged stay of the applicant, suffering from paranoid schizophrenia, in the specialised structure (Residence for Execution of Security Measures – “REMS”) of Palombara Sabina (Rome), notwithstanding judicial orders requesting his transfer to another specialised medical structure (care home – “ Casa di Cura ”). The placement in a REMS was ordered on 11 August 2021 by the Rome District Court as a precautionary measure. Subsequently, on 9 May 2022, the measure was substituted by probation in a care home by the Rome preliminary investigations judge. The applicant was transferred to the REMS on 12 May 2022. Since then, multiple attempts have been made to transfer him to a care home. However, no available place has been found due to the lack of such places, the nature of his mental disorder and the required treatment. The applicant complains under Article 5 § 1 and Article 6 § 1 of the Convention about the detention regime he is subjected to, which is different from the probatory measure that has been ordered by the authorities, and about the non-enforcement of the decision that he should be placed in a care home issued by the preliminary investigations judge.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     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 in the REMS, after the decision ordering his probation with placement in a care facility, “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” within the meaning of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention (see, Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no. 18052/11, §   190, 31 January 2019 and see, mutatis mutandis , Sy   v. Italy, no.   11791/20, §   119, 24 January 2022)?   2.     Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as regards the implementation of the decision issued by the preliminary investigations judge of the Rome District Court on 9 May 2022 (see,   mutatis mutandis , Sy, cited above, § 153)?