CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 12 mars 2026

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s65E06E64 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } Published on 30 March 2026   SECOND SECTION Application no. 13020/23 Ersan IDRIZI against North Macedonia lodged on 21 March 2023 communicated on 12 March 2026 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the alleged lack of an effective investigation into the allegedly racially motivated attack against the applicant, who is of Roma origin, by his work colleague. The applicant submits that the colleague physically attacked him (by dragging him and hitting him on two different occasions) and verbally assaulted him (by threatening him and insulting him on racial grounds). In misdemeanour proceedings for disturbance of public order, in which the applicant did not participate, the colleague was convicted of having grabbed and dragged the applicant on one occasion and was imposed a fine of 200 euros. The applicant’s subsequent criminal complaints against the colleague lodged with the court (for bodily injury and threats on two occasions – both offences subject to private charges) and with the public prosecutor (for violence inflicted on two occasions – prosecutable proprio motu ) were dismissed by the courts at two levels of jurisdiction and by the prosecutor, respectively, on the grounds that further prosecution would run counter to the ne   bis   in idem principle. The applicant complains under Article 3 in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention, and under Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 thereof, about the lack of an effective investigation into the attacks on him and the racial motives thereof.     QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Has there been a violation of Article 3, alone or in conjunction with Article   14 and/or Article 1 of Protocol No. 12 thereof, on account of the alleged ineffective investigation into the applicant’s complaints of ill-treatment (see Bouyid v.   Belgium   [GC], no.   23380/09, §§   116-23, ECHR   2015; Sabalić v.   Croatia , no. 50231/13, §§ 94-115, 14   January 2021; X and Y v. North Macedonia , no.   173/17, § 50, 5 November 2020; and Chember v. Russia , no.   7188/03, §§   61 and 63, 3 July 2008)? In particular, were the alleged physical and verbal attacks on the applicant, as well as the alleged racial motive for them, effectively investigated? Did the misdemeanour proceedings comply with the requirements of an effective investigation under Articles 3 of the Convention? Was the attacker’s punishment proportionate to the gravity of the attack (see Sabalić , cited above, §§ 97, 110 and 111)?