Published on 11 April 2022

SECOND SECTION

Application no. 25609/18 Veaceslav PLATON against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 26 April 2018 communicated on 25 March 2022

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE

The application concerns the applicant’s alleged ill-treatment in prison and failure to carry out an effective investigation into his complaint of ill-treatment.

On 7 February 2017 a search in the applicant’s cell revealed a blunt knife and a can opener, both of which according to the applicant had been allowed by the prison staff in order to open canned food. When he was asked to give these items up he refused and force was used in the process of removing them. According to the applicant, the prison guards screwed his hands behind his back and hit him to his kidneys and the genital area. He was also struck on his hands with rubber sticks. The applicant was examined by a female doctor half an hour after the search ended and no signs of ill-treatment were found. The doctor noted the applicant’s refusal to be examined by her in the genital area, but no male doctor was called to examine him, despite his request to that effect. A week later and in the presence of his lawyer, the doctors found multiple 3-9 days’ old bruises on his upper limbs. He was never examined in the genital area and his request to be subjected to a psychological examination was not accepted.

The applicant complains of breaches of Article 3 of the Convention that he was ill-treated by the prison guards and that the authorities had failed to carry out an effective investigation into his ill-treatment. He also complains of a breach of Article 13 since he could not claim damages in civil proceedings in the absence of the guards’ conviction.

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular, was the applicant ill-treated in prison? Did the authorities carry out an effective investigation into his allegation of ill-treatment? ( Trocin v. the Republic of Moldova , no. 23847/19, §§ 48-63, 16 March 2021)

2. Did the applicant have effective remedies, as required under Article 13, to claim damages from those who had allegedly ill-treated him, in the absence of a criminal conviction? ( Corsacov v. Moldova , no. 18944/02, §§ 81 and 82, 4 April 2006)