Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2020 - 39415/15

Thus, the national authorities have an obligation to protect the health and well-being of persons who have been deprived of their liberty by providing them with the medical care necessary to safeguard their lives (see Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 71, 22 November 2011).

That is the case, for instance, where a person dies in custody in suspicious circumstances (even where the apparent cause of death is a medical condition), which, as a rule, raises the question of whether the State has complied with its positive obligation to protect that person's right to life (see Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, § 30, ECHR 2004-IX (extracts); Kats and Others, cited above, § 115; Geppa v. Russia, no. 8532/06, § 71, 3 February 2011; and Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 87, 22 November 2011).

Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2020 - 39415/15

That is the case, for instance, where a person dies in custody in suspicious circumstances (even where the apparent cause of death is a medical condition), which, as a rule, raises the question of whether the State has complied with its positive obligation to protect that person's right to life (see Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, § 30, ECHR 2004-IX (extracts); Kats and Others, cited above, § 115; Geppa v. Russia, no. 8532/06, § 71, 3 February 2011; and Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 87, 22 November 2011).

Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2020 - 39415/15

The Court will thus examine whether the medical treatment which the applicant's son received in detention during the final months of his life was adequate (see Tarariyeva v. Russia, no. 4353/03, §§ 77-89, ECHR 2006-XV (extracts)).

Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2020 - 39415/15

That is the case, for instance, where a person dies in custody in suspicious circumstances (even where the apparent cause of death is a medical condition), which, as a rule, raises the question of whether the State has complied with its positive obligation to protect that person's right to life (see Slimani v. France, no. 57671/00, § 30, ECHR 2004-IX (extracts); Kats and Others, cited above, § 115; Geppa v. Russia, no. 8532/06, § 71, 3 February 2011; and Makharadze and Sikharulidze v. Georgia, no. 35254/07, § 87, 22 November 2011).

Auszug aus EGMR, 04.02.2020 - 39415/15

The essential purpose of such an investigation is to establish the facts, secure the effective implementation of domestic laws which protect the right to life and, in those cases involving State agents or bodies, identify any persons at fault and thus ensure their accountability (see Pearson v. the United Kingdom (dec.), no. 40957/07, § 67, 13 December 2011, with further references).