A selection of key paragraph(s) can be found below the document.
79. As to the seriousness of the ill-treatment in question, the Court notes that the injuries sustained by the applicant, and in particular the rib fractures and the pneumothorax, attest to the severity of the ill-treatment the applicant suffered. According to the description provided by the applicant, this treatment was administered behind closed doors in the police station, where the applicant had no means of resisting. There is no indications that the recourse to physical force had been in any way made necessary by the applicant’s own conduct (see Bouyid, cited above, § 85). Furthermore, despite the seriousness of the injuries caused to the applicant, he was not provided with immediate medical assistance. In these circumstances his physical pain associated with the above injury must have been exacerbated by feelings of helplessness, acute stress and anxiety. Moreover, the applicant’s ill‑treatment was intentional and was aimed at extracting evidence from him in relation to the crime of which he was suspected (see, similarly, Belousov v. Ukraine, no. 4494/07 § 67, 7 November 2013).
80. In these circumstances, the Court finds that, taken as a whole and having regard to its purpose and severity, the ill-treatment at issue amounted to torture within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention.