CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 24 novembre 2022

.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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } .s1DE04B9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Published on 12 December 2022   THIRD SECTION Application no. 36384/22 Hüseyın BAYBASIN against the Netherlands lodged on 21 July 2022 communicated on 24 November 2022 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the random strip search which was carried out on 10 February 2021, after the applicant, who is serving a life-imprisonment sentence, had been visited by his lawyer. The Complaints Commission ( beklagcommissie ) of the Supervisory Board ( Commissie van Toezicht ) of the Rotterdam prison, location “De Schie”, dismissed the applicant’s complaint that the strip search had violated his rights under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention because there had been no cause to carry it out and because no strip searches should be carried out after “privileged visits”. The Complaints Commission reiterated its view that it was not unreasonable or unfair that the randomiser had to be pressed after receiving external visitors, including visits of lawyers, for reasons of prison security. The applicant’s appeal to the Appeals Board ( beroepscommissie ) of the Council for the Administration of Criminal Justice and Protection of Juveniles ( Raad voor Strafrechtstoepassing en Jeugdbescherming ) was dismissed.     QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Taking into account that strip searches may be necessary on occasion to ensure prison security or prevent disorder or crime ( Frérot v. France , no.   70204/01, § 38, 12 June 2007; Roth v. Germany , nos. 6780/18 and   30776/18, § 65, 22 October 2020) and having regard the specific circumstances of the case, was the strip search incompatible with Articles   3 and/or 8 of the Convention?