Communicated on 12 May 2016

THIRD SECTION

Application no 56220/15 Said Dzhaparovich Amirov against Russia lodged on 17 November 2015

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Said Dzhaparovich Amirov , is a Russian national, born in 1954. He is re presented before the Court by Mr Grégory Thuan dit Dieudonné , a lawyer based in Strasbourg.

The background to the case is set out in the judgment of Amirov v. Russia , no. 51857/13 , §§ 8-49, 27 November 2014 .

The subsequent development of the case , as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

On 27 August 2015 the Military Court of the North-Caucasus Military Circuit convicted the applicant of having organi s ed an attempt to commit aggravated murder and sentenced him to life imprisonment .

On 24 March 2016 the Supreme Court of Russia upheld the conviction on appeal.

On 1 April 2016 the applicant was sent to serve a sentence to correctional colony no. 25/6 in Orenburg Region.

According to him, he was placed in an ordinary cell, not adapted for the needs of a wheelchair-bound person. There is no medical staff to assist him in his daily activities. He had to perform enema and urethral cauterisation himself. As a result his leg and torso muscles have further atrophied and he suffers from high blood sugar level.

On 6 May 2016 he requested the Court to apply interim measures under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, seeking his transport to an appropriate medical facility capable to ensure his treatment.

On 12 May 2016 the President of the Section, acting upon the applicant ’ s request, decided to apply Rule 39. Priority treatment under Rul e 41 of the Rules of Court was also granted and on the same day the case was communicated to the Government.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant in substance complains under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention and the lack of appropriate medical treatment.

QUESTION

Given the background to this case, and in particular the Court ’ s judgment Amirov v. Russia , cited above, which included an Article 46 ruling, are the applica nt ’ s current medical facilities, including conditions of his detention, and treatment compatible with the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention?