CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 11 mai 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Communicated on 11 May 2020 Published on 2 June 2020   SECOND SECTION Application no. 48309/19 Remigijus LANIAUSKAS against Lithuania lodged on 2 September 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant is serving a prison sentence. He complains under Article 3 of the Convention that his continued detention amounts to inhuman and degrading treatment because he is almost completely blind and the conditions in the prison are not appropriate to his state of health. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES Is the applicant’s continued detention compatible with Article 3 of the Convention, in view of his state of health? In particular, is he detained in conditions which are appropriate to his state of health (see Enea v. Italy [GC], no.   74912/01, § 58, ECHR 2009; Grimailovs v. Latvia , no.   6087/03, §§   150-53, 25 June 2013; and Yunusova and Yunusov v.   Azerbaijan , no.   59620/14, § 138, 2 June 2016)?