Lexploria - Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Lexploria beta Legal research enhanced by smart algorithms
Menu
Browsing history:

SCIALACQUA v. ITALY

Doc ref: 34151/96 • ECHR ID: 001-4329

Document date: July 1, 1998

  • Inbound citations: 0
  • Cited paragraphs: 0
  • Outbound citations: 1

SCIALACQUA v. ITALY

Doc ref: 34151/96 • ECHR ID: 001-4329

Document date: July 1, 1998

Cited paragraphs only



                      AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF

                      Application No. 34151/96

                      by Roberto SCIALACQUA

                      against Italy

     The European Commission of Human Rights (First Chamber) sitting

in private on 1 July 1998, the following members being present:

           MM    M.P. PELLONPÄÄ, President

                 N. BRATZA

                 E. BUSUTTIL

                 A. WEITZEL

                 C.L. ROZAKIS

           Mrs   J. LIDDY

           MM    L. LOUCAIDES

                 B. MARXER

                 B. CONFORTI

                 I. BÉKÉS

                 G. RESS

                 A. PERENIC

                 C. BÎRSAN

                 K. HERNDL

                 M. VILA AMIGÓ

           Mrs   M. HION

           Mr    R. NICOLINI

           Mrs   M.F. BUQUICCHIO, Secretary to the Chamber

     Having regard to Article 25 of the Convention for the Protection

of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms;

     Having regard to the application introduced on 22 August 1996 by

Roberto SCIALACQUA against Italy and registered on 12 December 1996

under file No. 34151/96;

     Having regard to the report provided for in Rule 47 of the Rules

of Procedure of the Commission;

     Having deliberated;

     Decides as follows:

THE FACTS

     The applicant is an Italian national currently residing in

Barbarano Romano, Viterbo.

     The facts of the present case, as submitted by the applicant, may

be summarized as follows.

     In June 1985 the applicant, while helping a drug addict, got

pricked with an infected needle and got infected with hepatitis B.

     The applicant's illness remained fairly stable until 1995.

     In June 1995 the applicant underwent some medical examinations.

He was told that the situation had worsened dramatically and that he

might need a liver transplant.

     The applicant contacted a doctor in London who proposed him an

alternative treatment with herbal remedies (fitofarmaci). This

treatment proved to be successful and the applicant's condition has

improved.

     The cost of the treatment is about 1,000,000 Italian liras per

month.

     The applicant has regularly sent the receipts of the medicines

to the local division of the national public health service asking for

refund.

     The applicant's requests have always been rejected on the ground

that the medicines the applicant makes use of are not listed in the

"medicines' list" (prontuario farmaceutico) which is the list of the

medicines officially recognized as such in Italy.

COMPLAINT

     The applicant complains, under Article 2, that his right to life

is violated because the Italian public health service does not pay for

the medicines he needs. The applicant claims that without these

medicines his life would be put at risk.

THE LAW

     The applicant complains that the refusal of the authorities to

provide financial covering for the medical treatment which he is taking

constitutes a breach of his right to life guaranteed by Article 2

(Art. 2) of the Convention.

     The first paragraph of Article 2 (Art. 2) of the Convention

provides that "everyone's right to life shall be protected by law" and

that "no one shall be deprived of his life intentionally".

     The Commission recalls that this provision obliges the State not

only to refrain from depriving of life "intentionally" but also to take

adequate measures to protect life (No. 20948/92, Dec. 22.5.95, D.R. 81,

pp. 35, 39).

     However, even assuming that Article 2 (Art. 2) of the Convention

can be interpreted as imposing on States the obligation to cover the

costs of certain medical treatments or medicines that are essential in

order to save lives, the Commission considers that this provision

cannot be interpreted as requiring States to provide financial covering

for medicines which are not listed as officially recognised medicines.

     It follows that the application must be rejected as manifestly

ill-founded within the meaning of Article 27 para. 2 (Art. 27-2) of the

Convention.

     For these reasons, the Commission, unanimously,

     DECLARES THE APPLICATION INADMISSIBLE.

     M.F. BUQUICCHIO                            M.P. PELLONPÄÄ

        Secretary                                 President

   to the First Chamber                      of the First Chamber

© European Union, https://eur-lex.europa.eu, 1998 - 2026

LEXI

Lexploria AI Legal Assistant

Active Products: EUCJ + ECHR Data Package + Citation Analytics • Documents in DB: 401132 • Paragraphs parsed: 45279850 • Citations processed 3468846