CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 27 mars 2025

.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 14 April 2025   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 17499/24 Camelia FERU against Italy lodged on 21 June 2024 communicated on 27 March 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The case concerns the applicant’s detention for about eight months in the Centre for Repatriation ( Centro di Permanenza per i Rimpatri or “ CPR ”) of Rome – Ponte Galeria. The applicant, a woman suffering from psychiatric disorders whose identity and nationality were at the time unknown, has been detained in Rome ‑ Ponte Galeria CPR for the purpose of her expulsion since October 2023. On 21 June 2024, the applicant filed a request under Rule 39 of the Rules of the Court, which was granted on 3 July 2024. On 12 July 2024, the applicant was transferred to a psychiatric hospital in Rome. On 13   August 2024, the applicant was appointed a legal guardian to represent her interests. The legal guardian signed the application form in this case. The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention of the conditions of her detention in Rome – Ponte Galeria CPR, submitting that they were inadequate, given her mental health conditions and the absence of adequate healthcare. Relying on Article 13 of the Convention, she also complains of the lack of domestic remedies in respect of her complaints under Article   3. The applicant further alleges that her detention in the CPR has been unlawful and arbitrary in breach of Article 5 § 1 (f) of the Convention, and that she was not given the possibility to obtain compensation under Article   5   § 5 of the Convention. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, during her detention at the Centre for Repatriation of Rome – Ponte Galeria? In particular: (a)     Were the applicant’s conditions of detention in conformity with her state of health? (b)     Did the applicant receive adequate medical treatment during the above-mentioned period (see for example Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no.   18052/11, §§ 146-47, 31 January 2019, and Strazimiri v.   Albania , no.   34602/16, §§ 103-12, 21 January 2020, as well as, mutatis mutandis , Sy v.   Italy , no. 11791/20, §§ 76-89, 24 January 2022)?   2.     Was the applicant deprived of her liberty in breach of Article   5 §   1? In particular: (a)     Was the applicant’s detention justified under the second limb of Article   5 § 1 (f) (see A. and Others v. the United Kingdom [GC], no.   3455/05, §   164, ECHR 2009 [GC], and M. and Others v. Bulgaria , no.   41416/08, 26   July 2011)? (b)     Did domestic authorities consider alternatives to detention in the light of the applicant’s condition and the specific circumstances of the individual case (see, for example, Yoh-Ekale Mwanje v.   Belgium , no.   10486/10, 20   December 2011).   3.     Did the applicant have an effective compensatory remedy in respect of her complaints under Article 5 of the Convention?   4.     Did the applicant have an effective domestic remedy to complain of the alleged violation of Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention?