CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 février 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s23860FF7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase }   Communicated on 24 February 2016   FOURTH SECTION Application no 47799/15 Anton CALARA against Romania lodged on 6 November 2015   SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE   The application concerns the alleged ill-treatment suffered by the applicant at the hands of police and the domestic authorities’ failure to conduct a prompt and effective investigation into his complaints. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Was the applicant subjected to ill-treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, as a result of the acts allegedly perpetrated on him by two police officers on 2 August 2013?   2.     Did the authorities conduct an effective investigation into the applicant’s allegations under Article 3? In particular, did the investigation in question satisfy the requirements set out in the decision of the chief prosecutor of 12 September 2014? Did the criminal investigation conducted by the domestic authorities fulfil the conditions of adequacy and promptness as required under the procedural head of Article 3 of the Convention?