Applicant name | MALAI |
Applicant type | prisoner |
Number of applicants | 1 |
Country | MOLDOVA |
Application no. | 24179/18 |
Date | 19/11/2024 |
Judges | Jovan Ilievski, President, Diana Sârcu, Gediminas Sagatys |
Institution | Court |
Type | Judgment |
Outcome Art. 8 | violation |
Reason | no legal basis |
Type of privacy | informational privacy |
Keywords | quality of law; monitoring police cel |
Facts of the case | The applicant further argued that the video surveillance during her police custody had been unlawful and had violated Article 8 of the Convention. |
Analysis | The Government have not submitted any evidence that the impugned measure had some basis in domestic law, which was adequately accessible and foreseeable and afforded adequate legal protection against arbitrariness and accordingly indicated with sufficient clarity the scope of discretion conferred on the competent authorities and the manner of its exercise. With regard to the latter requirement, the Government have also failed to submit any information as to whether the applicant’s placement under permanent video surveillance was based on an individualised and reasoned decision providing grounds which would have justified the measure in question in the light of the legitimate aims pursued; whether the contested measure was limited in time, and whether the administration of the pre‑trial detention centre was under an obligation to review regularly (or at all) the well-foundedness of such a measure. |
Other Article violation? | 5 |
Damage awarded | Holds (a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicant, within three months, the following amounts, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement: (i) EUR 5,000 (five thousand euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable, in respect of non-pecuniary damage; (ii) EUR 1,500 (one thousand and five hundred euros), plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant, in respect of costs and expenses; |
Documents | Judgment |