CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 31 janvier 2023

.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 } Published on 20 February 2023   FIFTH SECTION Application no. 35640/22 X against Georgia lodged on 19 July 2022 communicated on 31 January 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application mainly concerns, under Articles 3, 8 and 14 of the Convention, the respondent State’s alleged failure to conduct an effective criminal investigation into allegations of molestation of the applicant, who was a minor, aged twelve, at the material time of the events, by her stepfather. There is an additional aspect calling into question purportedly inappropriate behaviour by certain investigative officers committed against the applicant during the investigation of her molestation case, such as, the allegations of subjecting her to unnecessary and embarrassing gynaecological examinations and interrogation techniques. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Having regard to the positive obligations of respondent States inherent in Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention to carry out a thorough and effective investigation and prosecution of acts of sexual abuse, has the domestic criminal investigation into the allegations of molestation of the applicant by her stepfather been in breach of either of the above ‑ mentioned Articles (see, for example, Y. v. Slovenia , no. 41107/10, §§ 95-100, ECHR 2015 (extracts))?   2.     Has the applicant exhausted an effective domestic remedy, as required by Article   35 §   1 of the Convention, for the purposes of her separate complaint about the allegedly inappropriate behaviour committed by the relevant investigative officers against her personal integrity? In the affirmative, could the impugned behaviour of the relevant investigative officers during the criminal investigation of the applicant’s molestation case be said to have constituted an additional breach of the respondent State’s negative obligations under either Article 3 or Article 8 of the Convention (see Y v. Slovenia , cited above, §§ 101-16)?   3.     Has the applicant suffered gender-based discrimination contrary to Article 14 of the Convention, read in conjunction with either Article 3 or Article 8 of the Convention, during the conduct of the criminal investigation?