Published on 25 April 2022

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 16194/18 Andrei MÄ‚TÄ‚SARU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 22 March 2018 communicated on 6 April 2022

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the alleged ill-treatment to which the applicant was subject in a psychiatric ward and the ineffective investigation into his allegations of ill-treatment. In particular, in 2016 the applicant spent a month in the psychiatric ward following which he presented signs of violence and ill-health. His complaints concerning the material conditions and the regime of his internment, the neglect of the medical staff as well as concerning ill ‑ treatment at the hands of other residents of the ward were repeatedly dismissed as ill-founded but the investigation was reopened after his appeals were upheld. The applicant complains of a violation his rights under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, as well as under Article 14 read in conjunction with his other complaints.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Does the manner in which the authorities have handled their obligation to provide the applicant with care and treatment, in view of his particular medical situation, constitute inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention or amount to a violation of Article 8 of the Convention? Was the applicant housed and treated in insalubrious conditions and subjected to various forms of violence or coercion, including from other residents of the psychiatric ward, in breach of Article 3 and/or 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014, and B. v. Romania (no. 2) , no. 1285/03, 19 February 2013)??

2. Having regard to the procedural protection under Article 3 and/or 8 of the Convention, did the authorities carry out an effective investigation into the applicant’s allegations of ill-treatment and other forms of coercion and neglect (see, mutatis mutandis, Centre for Legal Resources on behalf of Valentin Câmpeanu v. Romania [GC], no. 47848/08, ECHR 2014, and B. v. Romania (no. 2) , no. 1285/03, 19 February 2013)?

3. Has the applicant suffered discrimination in the enjoyment of his Convention rights on the ground of his medical condition, contrary to Article 14 of the Convention read in conjunction with Articles 3 and 8?