Communicated on 24 January 2018

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 4 459 2/16 Ala BOBOC and Others against the Republic of Moldova and 6 other applications (see list appended)

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

All the applications mentioned above concern alleged ill-treatment or excessive use of force committed by State agents or with their alleged approval, as well as the allegedly insufficient investigation into the complaints about such ill-treatment or excessive use of force (this latter respect does not concern application no. 24737/15). Some raise additional issues under Articles 2 (concerning the death of a person during the public unrest in April 2009), 3 (conditions of detention and medical treatment of detainees) and 5 § 3 (reasons for extending detention pending trial), as shown in the included Appendix.

QUESTIONS tO THE PARTIES

1. In each application listed above, has th ere been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular, was each applicant (or their relative, in the case of Mr Boboc ’ s par ents and wife) subjected to ill ‑ treatment or excessive use of force by State agents (see, among many other authorities, Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, §§ 81-90 , ECHR 2015 and Ciorap v. the Republic of Moldova (no. 5) , no. 7232/07 , §§ 43-47 and 64, 15 March 2016 )?

2. In each application listed above (except application no. 24737/15), has an effective investigation, within the meaning of Article 3, been carried out in respect of the complaints about ill-treatment or excessive use of force (see, for instance, Jeronovičs v. Latvia [GC], no. 44898/10 , §§ 103-107, ECHR 2016 )?

3. In application no. 44592/16, has there been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention due to the excessive use of force against the applicants ’ son/husband? Has there been an effective investigation into that death (see, for instance, Mustafa Tunç and Fecire Tunç v. Turkey [GC], no. 24014/05 , §§ 169-182, 14 April 2015 )? Can the applicants still claim to be victims of a violation of Article 2?

4. In applications nos. 4670/16, 11272/16 and 33968/16, did each applicant receive medical treatment while in detention, as required by his condition (see, for instance, Mozer v. the Republic of Moldova and Russia [GC], no. 11138/10, § 178, ECHR 2016)?

5. Have the applicants in applications nos. 12591/15, 11272/16 and 33968/16 been detained in conditions incompatible with the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention (see, for instance, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13 , §§ 96-141 , ECHR 2016 and Khlaifia and Others v. Italy [GC], no. 16483/12, § 158-167, ECHR 2016 (extracts))? Did the applicant in application no. 11272/16 have an effective remedy, as required by Article 13 of the Convention, in respect of this complaint under Article 3 (see Shishanov v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 11353/06 , §§ 123-139, 15 September 2015 )?

6. Has there been a breach of Article 5 § 3 of the Convention in application no. 4670/16 as a result of the repeated extensions of the applicant ’ s detention pending trial, considering his inability to move (see, for instance, Sarban v. Moldova , no. 3456/05, §§ 92-104, 4 October 2005 )?

APPENDIX

Name and application no.

Date of introduction

Complaints

1.Boboc and others, no. 44592/16

22 July 2016

Article 2 – death of V.B. (the applicants ’ son/husband) at the hands of the police and insufficient investigation

Article 3 – V.B. ’ s ill-treatment during the events and insufficient investigation; impunity

2.Levinte , no. 12591/15

28 February 2015

Article 3 – ill-treatment during arrest and insufficient compensation.

3.Cretu , no. 24737/15

7 May 2015

Article 3 – ill-treatment after the public unrest in April 2009 and insufficient investigation thereof

4.Canuda , no. 4670/16

11 January 2016

Article 3 - ill-treatment during arrest and insufficient investigation; insufficient medical treatment and inhuman conditions of detention

Article 5 § 3 – insufficient reasons for extending detention pending trial, in view of the applicant ’ s disability

5.Nitu , no. 11272/16

21 February 2016

Article 3 – excessive use of force against a vulnerable detainee; absence of specialised (psychiatric) medical treatment so as to prevent the applicant from being subjected to violence from the prison guards and cellmates; inhuman conditions of detention

Article 13 – absence of a remedy in respect of conditions of detention

6.Povestca , no. 33968/16

7 September 2016

Article 3 – ill-treatment during arrest and insufficient investigation

7.Matveev , no. 36601/16

18 June 2016

Article 3 – ill-treatment during arrest and insufficient investigation