CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 20 novembre 2025

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .sB20B16E1 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:18pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } Published on 8 December 2025   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 25981/24 Ricardo Jorge PAIS FERNANDES PARGANA against Portugal lodged on 3 September 2024 communicated on 20 November 2025 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The applicant has been detained in the psychiatric unit of Caxias Prison Hospital since January 2024 pursuant to a decision of an investigating judge at Almada Criminal Court of 10 May 2024 to place him on preventive pre-trial detention ( internamento preventivo ) in view of his mental health condition (paranoid schizophrenia), foreseen in Article 202 § 2 of the Criminal Code, on suspicion of attempted homicide. Relying on Article 3 of the Convention, the applicant complains about his conditions of detention. He alleges, in particular, that he is not receiving individualised medical care for his mental health condition. Invoking Article 5 §§ 1, 3 and 4 of the Convention, the applicant further complains that his detention is unlawful and that he should be detained in a psychiatric facility instead of a prison. Under Article 13 of the Convention, he claims that he does not have an effective remedy at his disposal to complain thereto. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has the applicant been subject to inhuman and degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3?   In particular:   (a)     Is the applicant receiving adequate medical treatment at Caxias Prison Hospital (see Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no.   18052/11, §§   146-48, 31 January 2019; Strazimiri v. Albania , no.   34602/16, §   103, 21 January 2020; and Miranda Magro v.   Portugal , no.   30138/21, §§ 73-74 and § 81, 9 January 2024)?   (b)     Are the applicant’s conditions of detention in conformity with the applicant’s state of health, and with the decision issued by the Almada Criminal Court on 10 May 2024?   2.     Has there been a breach of Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, considering the mental health conditions of the applicant, is his detention in the psychiatric unit of a regular prison establishment compatible with Article 5 § 1 e) of the Convention (see Ilnseher v. Germany [GC], nos.   10211/12 and 27505/14, § 127, 4 December 2018; Rooman , cited above, § 192 and Miranda Magro , cited above, § 90)?   3.     Did the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy for his complaints under Article 3 and Article 5 § 1, as required by Article   13 of the Convention?