FIFTH SECTION
CASE OF A.V. v. THE REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA
(Application no. 40110/15)
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
STRASBOURG
5 February 2026
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of A.V. v. the Republic of Moldova,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
 María Elósegui, President,
 Diana Sârcu,
 Sébastien Biancheri, judges,
and Martina Keller, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to:
the application (no. 40110/15) against the Republic of Moldova lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on 6 August 2015 by a Moldovan national, A.V. (“the applicant”), who was born in 1967, lives in Chisinau and was represented by Mr R. Zadoinov, a lawyer practising in Chișinău;
the decision to give notice of the application to the Moldovan Government (“the Government”), represented by their Agent, Mr D. Obadă;
the decision not to have the applicant’s name disclosed;
the parties’ observations;
Having deliberated in private on 15 January 2026,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE
1. The case concerns the allegedly ineffective investigation into the sexual assault and death of A., the applicant’s daughter. The applicant complained of a violation of her rights under Articles 2, 3, 8 and 13 of the Convention. 2. On 2 November 2013 the applicant’s 15-year-old daughter, A., was found dead after falling from the nineteenth floor of a building. The crime scene report described the position of A.’s body on the ground, her clothes (including her underwear), the presence of bone and brain tissue around the body, and scratches on her hands. The photographs included in the crime scene report show A.’s body lying on the ground with her trousers lowered to her knees and a white belt cut into several pieces. 3. A forensic medical report dated 5 November 2013 described A.’s trousers as having been torn in the middle and lowered to her knees and the white belt as having been cut in two places. The report confirmed the presence of semen in A.’s vagina. Alcohol was found in her stomach and intestines but not in her blood. No traces of drugs were found in her body. The report concluded that A. had died following the fall and that all injuries on her body, including the scratches on her hands, had resulted from it. Investigation into A.’s death
4. On 2 December 2013 the prosecutor refused to initiate any investigation into A.’s death. The applicant lodged a complaint against that refusal, and on 16 December 2013 an investigation into suspected coercion or incitement to suicide was ordered by a hierarchically superior prosecutor. 5. During the investigation a dozen witnesses were questioned, including two witnesses who had seen A. fall, the applicant, A.’s stepfather, a number of A.’s acquaintances and a psychologist. The acquaintances submitted that A. had been missing her deceased father and had had a difficult relationship with her mother, the applicant, who had forbidden her from seeing her boyfriend, V.I. The psychologist submitted that a year earlier the applicant had sought assistance in respect of A.’s aggressive and depressive moods, which had not improved. 6. During the investigation one of the witnesses, V.I.’s father, produced a letter which was subsequently confirmed as having been handwritten by A. In the letter, A. seemed to be saying farewell because she was seriously ill. It was not established when the letter had been written and given to V.I. 7. On 19 February 2014 a forensic medical report confirmed that the cause of A.’s death had been the fall. It also confirmed the presence of semen in A.’s body, but found no signs of self-defence. 8. Samples of saliva and blood were collected from V.I. and I.C. It was concluded after a forensic examination that the semen found in A.’s body could have belonged to V.I. or to V.I. and I.C., but not exclusively to I.C. The report noted that the persons conducting the forensic examination had lacked the equipment necessary to conduct a DNA analysis. 9. On 31 December 2014 the prosecutor discontinued the criminal investigation into the possibility that A. had been incited to suicide, concluding that A. had been suffering from depression and had taken her own life. The prosecutor referred to the witness statements and expert reports contained in the case file (see paragraphs 5-7 above). 10. The applicant lodged a complaint against that decision, noting that the investigation had not attempted to establish who had had sexual relations with A. shortly before her death. On 18 February 2015 the hierarchically superior prosecutor dismissed the applicant’s complaint, noting that a criminal investigation into the matter had been initiated on 29 December 2014 (see paragraph 14 below). 11. The applicant appealed against the prosecutor’s decision, arguing that she had not been properly involved in the investigation into her daughter’s death and that it had not been effective. On 25 May 2015 the Botanica investigating judge rejected the appeal as ill‑founded. 12. The applicant appealed against the decision of the investigating judge, raising in essence issues similar to those raised in her previous appeals (see paragraphs 10-11 above). On 29 June 2015 the Chișinău Court of Appeal rejected the appeal as ill-founded. 13. In the course of the investigation, the applicant complained on several occasions of its ineffectiveness and of never being given the opportunity to submit questions to the experts or to receive regular information about the investigation and copies of material contained in the case file. She also complained of the failure to carry out investigative measures on the basis of information that she had supplied. On several occasions the prosecutor ordered that the applicant be provided with copies of certain documents, explaining that providing her with a copy of the entire case file or copies of certain other documents was not possible because the investigation was ongoing. Investigation into the sexual assault
14. On 29 December 2014 an investigation into voluntary sexual relations with a person under the age of 16 was initiated. However, it was suspended on 25 February 2015 until possible perpetrators could be identified. The criminal investigation file submitted by the Government contained copies of documents from the case-file material relating to the criminal investigation into suspected incitement to suicide (see paragraphs 5-8 above). Additionally, the investigating authorities had obtained information from A.’s social media account. 15. The applicant did not appeal against the decision to suspend the investigation. 16. The applicant complained of a violation of her rights under Articles 2, 3, 8 and 13 of the Convention.

Outcome for Article 2: violation