European Court of Human Rights - Cestaro v. Italy - Application no. 6884/11

giurisprudenza e prassi internazionale - international case-law and practice

Data – Date :

07/04/2015

Note – Notes:

Ruling:

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, […] Holds that there was a violation of Article 3 of the Convention under its procedural head;

Reference to obligations of criminalization:

Paragraph 209: For an investigation to be effective in practice it is a prerequisite that the State has enacted criminal-law provisions penalising practices that are contrary to Article 3 (see Gäfgen, cited above, § 117). The absence of criminal legislation capable of preventing and effectively punishing the perpetrators of acts contrary to Article 3 can prevent the authorities from prosecuting violations of that fundamental value of democratic societies, assessing their gravity, imposing adequate penalties and precluding the implementation of any measure likely to weaken the penalty excessively, undermining its preventive and dissuasive effect (see M.C. v. Bulgaria, no. 39272/98, §§ 149, 153 and 166, ECHR 2003 XII; Tzekov, cited above, § 71; and Çamdereli, cited above, § 38; under Article 4, see, mutatis mutandis, Siliadin v. France, no. 73316/01, §§ 89, 112 and 148, ECHR 2005 VII).

Reference to human dignity:

paragraph 177. In the present case, the Court cannot overlook the fact that according to the Court of Cassation the violence at the Diaz-Pertini School of which the applicant was a victim had been perpetrated “for punitive purposes, for retribution, geared to causing humiliation and physical and mental suffering on the part of the victims”, and that it could qualify as “torture” under the terms of the Convention for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (see paragraph 77 above).
paragraph 178. Furthermore, it transpires from the case file that the police officers kicked the applicant and struck him with tonfa-type truncheons, which the appeal judgment described as potentially lethal (see paragraph 68 above), and that the applicant had been repeatedly hit on different parts of his body.
The blows received by the applicant caused multiple fractures (to the right ulna, the right styloid, the right fibula and several ribs), leading to a four-day stay in hospital, over forty days’ unfitness for work, a surgical operation during his stay in hospital and a further operation a few years later, all of which left the applicant with a permanent weakness in his left arm and leg (see paragraphs 34-35 and 155 above). The ill-treatment inflicted on the applicant has therefore had severe physical consequences.
Nor should the applicant’s feelings of fear and anguish be underestimated. Having found accommodation in a night shelter, the applicant was awakened by the noise caused by the police storming the building. In addition to the blows which he received, he witnessed several security officers beating other occupiers of the building for no apparent reason.
In that connection, regard should also be had to the conclusions reached by the domestic courts in the framework of the criminal proceedings, with which the Government declared their broad agreement: according to the first-instance judgment, the conduct of the police inside the Diaz-Pertini School constituted a clear violation of the law, “of human dignity and of respect for the individual” (see paragraph 51 above); according to the appeal judgment, the officers systematically beat those inside the building in a cruel and sadistic manner, acting like “violent thugs” (see paragraphs 67 and 73 above); the Court of Cassation mentioned “egregious” violence of the “utmost gravity” (see paragraph 77 above).
In their observations before the Court, the Government themselves described the actions of the police in the Diaz-Pertini School as “very serious and deplorable acts”.
paragraph 179. In sum, it cannot be denied that the ill-treatment inflicted on the applicant “caused severe pain and suffering and was particularly serious and cruel” (Selmouni, cited above, § 105, and Erdal Aslan, citéd above, § 73).

Norme penali italiane rilevanti – Relevant italian rules:

art. 3 ECHR

Parole chiave – Keywords:

Corte Europea dei Diritti Umani - European Court Of Human Rights, Giurisdizione - Jurisdiction, Tortura - Torture, Trattato - Treaty