CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 16 avril 2021

.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 } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .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 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s3DC36BA9 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline; color:#0069d6 } Published on 3 May 2021   FIRST SECTION Application no. 368/21 Andrea CIOTTA against Italy lodged on 5 January 2021 communicated on 21 January 2021 and 16 April 2021       The facts and complaints in this application have been summarised in the Court’s Subject Matter of the case and Questions to the parties, which is available in HUDOC. QUESTION Having regard to the delay with which measures were taken by the State in response to the decision under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court of 21   January 2021 (“to provide the applicant with an accommodation (be it in a REMS or elsewhere) where adequate treatment can be provided for his psychiatric condition”), was there a hindrance to the effective exercise of the applicant’s right of application, ensured by Article 34 of the Convention (see Mamatkulov and Askarov v. Turkey [GC], nos.   46827/99 and 46951/99 , §§ 128-129, ECHR 2005 ‑ I)?