Published on 27 March 2023
FIRST SECTION
Application no. 25063/20
Gianluca FANESI
against Italy
lodged on 19 June 2020
communicated on 10 March 2023
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
The application concerns the alleged ill-treatment of the applicant by police officers and the lack of an effective investigation into the incident. On 5 November 2017, in the aftermath of a football match, the applicant was involved in a fight that broke out between supporters of the two opposing teams. The applicant alleges that he was struck in the head by an officer present at the scene and that this caused him serious physical injuries that led to permanent neurological damage.
Relying on Article 3 of the Convention (substantive and procedural aspect), the applicant complains that the force used against him by the police had not been strictly necessary and that the investigation into his allegations had not been effective, as it had been characterised by a number of deficiencies and, amongst other things, had not led to the identification of those responsible for his injuries.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment at the hands of the police, in breach of the substantive limb of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular, was the force used in respect of the applicant strictly necessary in the circumstances of the case (see Bouyid v. Belgium [GC], no. 23380/09, §§ 81-90 and §§ 100-101, ECHR 2015)?
2. Having regard to the procedural protection from inhuman or degrading treatment (see paragraph 131 of Labita v. Italy [GC], no. 26772/95, ECHR 2000-IV), was the investigation in the present case by the domestic authorities in breach of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular:
Did the authorities take all the reasonable measures available to them to secure evidence concerning the impugned events (see El-Masri v. the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia [GC], no. 39630/09, § 183, ECHR 2012)?
Can it be said that the domestic investigation’s conclusions were based on a thorough, objective and impartial analysis of all relevant elements? Are the decisions taken by the domestic authorities adequately reasoned and do they take into account the applicant’s submissions made to those authorities?
Was the applicant able to participate in the domestic investigation (see Bouyid, cited above, § 122)?