Communicated on 25 October 2013

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 11726/09 Leonid NICOLSCHI and Anna NICOLSCHI against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 9 February 2009

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicants, Mr Leonid Nicolschi and Mrs Anna Nicolschi , are Moldovan nationals, who live in Glodeni .

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant s , may be summarised as follows.

The present case concerns the circumstances surrounding the death of the applicants ’ 29 -year-old son, Ruslan Nicolschi , on 5 June 20 06 .

On 1 June 2006 the applicants ’ son was arrested by the police on suspicion of theft and remanded in custody. On 4 June 2006 Ruslan Nicolschi was taken by the police to a psychiatric hospital where he died the next day.

A criminal investigation was conducted into the circumstances of Ruslan Nicolschi ’ s death during which two medical forensic examinations were conducted on his body. The results thereof were that he had died of a disease called Wernicke ’ s encephalopathy , a condition peculiar to malnourished people with alcohol misuse problems. The disease had started some four to five days prior to his death. The doctors did not find any signs of violence on Ruslan Nicolschi ’ s body.

On 31 January 2008 the Glodeni Prosecutor ’ s Office decided to discontinue the criminal investigation into the circumstances of Ruslan Nicolschi ’ s death on the ground that he had died of natural causes. In particular, the Prosecutor ’ s Office established that Ruslan Nicolschi had been an alcoholic and a former drug addict. He had also been HIV positive and suffered from hepatitis C. The fatal disease had developed against the background of his general condition and he could not be saved by the doctors from the psychiatric hospital. On the strength of the forensic reports, the Prosecutor ’ s Office ruled out the possibility of any physical force having been applied to Ruslan Nicolschi and concluded that the doctors from the psychiatric hospital could not be held responsible for his death.

The applicants appealed and argued inter alia that their son had been in good health and that he had never suffered of the diseases mentioned in the decision of the Prosecutor ’ s Office. Moreover, they contended that they had seen signs of ill-treatment on his dead body.

On 5 August 2008 a hierarchically superior prosecutor from the Glodeni Prosecutor ’ s Office dismissed the applicants ’ appeal as ill-founded. The applicants appealed before an investigating judge who dismissed their appeal on 27 November 2008.

COMPLAINT

The applicants complain under Article 2 of the Convention that the State was responsible for their son ’ s death and the domestic authorities did not effectively investigate the circumstances thereof .

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has the applicants ’ son ’ s right to life, ensured by Article 2 of the Convention, been violated in the present case?

In particular, did the applicants ’ son receive appropriate medical care from the moment of his arrest? The parties are requested to elaborate on the following aspects:

- when did the applicants ’ son started to feel ill and what where the steps taken by the State authorities to protect his life?

- was the Psychiatric Hospital where the applicants ’ son was hospitalized an appropriate medical institution for the treatment of his condition?

- when was the applicants ’ son diagnosed with the Wernicke ’ s encephalopathy for the first time?

- what was the treatment given to the applicants ’ son at the Psychiatric Hospital?

2. Having regard to the procedural protection of the right to life (see paragraph 104 of Salman v. Turkey [GC], no. 21986/93, ECHR 2000-VII), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 2 of the Convention?

The Government are asked to submit a copy of the full version of the case file concerning the criminal investigation into the circumstances of Ruslan Nicolschi ’ s death and a copy of the medical documents concerning Ruslan Nicolschi from the hospital where he had died.