Communicated on 1 December 2014

FOURTH SECTION

Application no. 65150/14 Davit CHICHUA against Georgia lodged on 16 September 2014

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The applicant, Mr Davit Chichua, is a Georgian national, who was born in 1961 and lives in Tbilisi. He is represented before the Court by Ms A. Avaliani, a lawyer practising in Tbilisi.

2. Between 25 March and 14 December 2012 the applicant was placed in pre-trial detention in prison no. 8 establishment in Tbilisi. During this period, allegedly, he was repeatedly severely beaten by the prison staff.

3. On 23 September 2012 a criminal investigation into the alleged acts of the applicant ’ s beating was opened in the Gldani-Nadzaladevi Regional Prosecutor ’ s Office . Since then, the applicant was questioned twice by the investigation. In addition, several documents have been requested from different State agencies. According to the applicant, in spite of his numerous requests to this effect, he has not been given the victim status yet.

4. In his latest response to the applicant ’ s and his lawyer ’ s repeated enquiries about the progress of the ongoing investigation, on 3 July 2014, the prosecutor in charge of the case indicated that he was still waiting to receive the aforementioned documents from different state agencies, including, e.g., the verbatim records of the applicant ’ s trial; in his letter he further noted that the investigation was still pending and would continue for an unforeseeable period of time as a number of complex investigative measure s were yet to be undertaken.

5. On 8 August 2014 the applicant ’ s lawyer sent another enquiry to the prosecutor, requesting more detailed information about the already undertaken and planned investigative measures in relation to the applicant ’ s case. It is unclear from the case file whether any response was received from the prosecutor to this latest enquiry by the time of submission of the present application to the Court.

COMPLAINT S

6. The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention, taken separately or in conjunction with Article 13 of the Convention, about his ill ‑ treatment in prison no. 8 establishment and the lack of effective investigation thereof.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has the applicant been subjected to ill- treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?

2. Have the domestic authorities fulfil led their obligations vis-à-vis the applicant with regard to the procedural limb of the prohibition of torture under Article 3 of the Convention (see paragraph 131 of Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, ECHR 2000-IV)?

3 . Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaint under Article 3 of the Convention, as required by Article 13 of the Convention ?