Published on 13 October 2025
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 23622/24
I.E.
against Italy
lodged on 8 August 2024
communicated on 22 September 2025
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the detention of the applicant, suffering from psychiatric disorders and substance abuse, in different prison facilities (from 27 January 2023 to 9 April 2024), notwithstanding domestic courts’ decisions ordering his release and his placement in a specialised structure (Residence for Execution of Security Measures – “REMS”).
In particular, by decision of 16 June 2022 the Potenza Supervisory Judge ordered that the applicant, who at the time was placed in a therapeutic community on the basis of a security measure, be transferred to a REMS. Following the commission of new crimes, on 26 January 2023 the Potenza Preliminary Investigations Judge ordered the applicant’s precautionary detention in prison. On 25 October 2023, the Potenza District Court sentenced the applicant to a suspended term of one year imprisonment and ordered his immediate release, unless he was detained for other reasons. The applicant remained in prison until 9 April 2024, when he was transferred to a REMS.
The applicant complains under Articles 3 and 5 §§ 1 and 5 of the Convention of the conditions of his detention in prison which were inadequate for his mental health in the absence of specific treatment, as well as the unlawfulness of his prolonged detention and the absence of compensation for his allegedly unlawful detention. He further complains under Articles 6 and 13 of the Convention about the non-enforcement of the domestic courts’ decisions ordering his placement in a specialised structure and his release from prison, and the absence of domestic remedies.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights under Article 3 of the Convention (see Sy v. Italy, no. 11791/20, §§ 76-89, 24 January 2022)? In particular:
(a) in light of the applicant’s psychiatric disorders, was the applicant’s detention in prison compatible with his state of health?
(b) did the applicant receive adequate medical treatment during his detention in prison (see Rooman v. Belgium [GC], no. 18052/11, §§ 146‑47, 31 January 2019, and Strazimiri v. Albania, no. 34602/16, §§ 103‑12, 21 January 2020)?
2. Has there been a breach of the applicant’s rights under Article 5 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, taking into account the decision of the Potenza District Court of 25 October 2023 ordering the applicant’s release unless detained for other reasons and the prior decision of the Potenza Supervisory Judge of 16 June 2022 ordering the applicant’s placement in a REMS, was the applicant’s continued detention “in accordance with a procedure prescribed by law” and justified for the purposes of that provision (see Sy, cited above, §§ 133-36)?
3. Did the applicant have an effective and enforceable right to compensation for his allegedly unlawful detention, as required by Article 5 § 5 of the Convention (see Sy, cited above, §§ 141-48)?
4. Has there been a breach of Article 6 § 1 of the Convention as regards the lack of implementation of the decisions issued on 16 June 2022 by the Potenza Supervisory Judge and on 25 October 2023 by the Potenza District Court (see Sy, cited above, § 153)?
5. Did the applicant have an effective remedy for the purposes of Article 13 of the Convention, to complain of the alleged violations of Articles 3 and 5 § 1 of the Convention?