CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 26 avril 2017

.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 } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic }     Communicated on 26 April 2017     SECOND SECTION Application no. 51107/12 Valeriu BUZU against the Republic of Moldova lodged on 7 August 2012 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the applicant’s detention for one night as a result of his peaceful protest. The applicant was charged with insulting the police but was subsequently acquitted by the courts which found the charges unfounded. After acquittal the applicant initiated civil proceedings against the State before the domestic courts claiming compensation in the amount of some 914 euros (EUR) for the breach of his rights guaranteed by Articles   5 and 11 of the Convention. The Supreme Court of Justice found that the applicant’s rights had been breached and awarded him the equivalent of some EUR 444. The applicant complains that the amount was not sufficient for him to lose his victim status under Articles 5 and 11 of the Convention. QUESTIONs tO THE PARTIES 1.     Bearing in mind the decisions of the domestic courts and the award of compensation granted to the applicant, can he still claim to be victim of a breach of Articles 5 and 11 of the Convention ( Brega v. Moldova , no.   52100/08, 20 April 2010)?   2.     If so, has there been a breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention as a result of his arrest and detention?   3.     Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights guaranteed by Article   11 of the Convention?