CCPR/C/127/D/2920/2016 court’s decision of 2 November 2010, stating, inter alia, that the author had not committed violent acts and did not constitute a threat to herself or to others, and ordered a review of the case. 2.7 From 8 May to 6 June 2012, the author was subjected to another forced hospitalization for compulsory inpatient psychiatric examination in Almaty, according to the decision of the Balkhash city court of 27 March 2012. The medical experts concluded that the author suffered from chronic delusional disorder, but that she did not constitute a threat to herself or to others. 2.8 On 26 July 2012, the Balkhash city court released the author of criminal responsibility on the charges under article 351 (2) of the Criminal Code and cancelled the order for her forced psychiatric treatment. The court noted that the law had been violated in the conduct of the previous examination, 8 and that the court had subsequently taken an unlawful decision about the necessity of the author’s hospitalization. On 3 August 2012, the author appealed against the Balkhash city court decision of 26 July 2012, requesting a new decision on the termination of the proceedings to be issued, stipulating the lack of evidence and of a corpus delicti and the recognition of the right to rehabilitation. On 16 October 2012, on appeal, the Karaganda regional court amended the decision of 26 July 2012, having taken into consideration the author’s arguments. The prosecutor of the Karaganda Region lodged a cassation appeal against the revised court decision. On 25 December 2012, on cassation, the Karaganda regional court found for the prosecution on appeal, and amended the decision of 16 October 2012 to indicate that the author’s actions constituted a crime. On 27 May 2013, the Supreme Court rejected the request to initiate supervisory review proceedings. 2.9 On 13 September 2012, on the cassation appeal of the author, the Almaty regional court quashed the decision of the Talgar district court of 6 September 2011 concerning the author’s forced psychiatric observation and treatment, as the decision of the Balkhash city court of 26 July 2012 had entered into force. On 27 September 2012, the author requested that her name be taken off the register of the Balkhash psychiatric centre, but to no avail. 2.10 On 5 June 2013, the author lodged an appeal with the Balkhash city prosecutor against her forced psychiatric hospitalization, since the measures of compulsory treatment had been lifted on 13 September 2012.9 Episode 4 of forced hospitalization 2.11 On 9 August 2013, the author was forcefully taken by two male nurses and two police officers10 to a clinic in Balkhash where she was subjected to medical treatment. In this context, the author was hit in the leg and head. The author’s neighbours saw her being forced, half-naked, into a car. Acting upon the Balkhash city prosecutor’s request of 12 August 2013 made on the basis of the medical expert commission’s opinion of 9 August 2013, on 20 August 2013 the Balkhash city court ordered the author’s forced psychiatric hospitalization and treatment. On 17 September 2013, the author was forced to undergo another compulsory psychiatric examination. On 19 September 2013, the Balkhash city prosecutor ordered another compulsory psychiatric examination. 11 The author lodged complaints of torture and inhuman and degrading treatment with the courts and the prosecutors, but to no avail. 12 The 20 August 2013 Balkhash city court ruling was upheld by the Karaganda regional court on 3 December 2013 on appeal and on 14 February 2014 on cassation. On 22 May 2014, the Supreme Court rejected the author’s request to initiate supervisory review proceedings concerning her forced psychiatric hospitalization of 9 August 2013. The applications of the author’s counsel requesting the author’s presence in 8 9 10 11 12 On 26 July 2012, the Balkhash city court issued a specific ruling concerning the experts that had examined the author in 2010, finding that they had engaged in incorrect behaviour and violations of the law during the examination. The author did not provide any information about the result of that appeal. In another part of the communication the author states that four police officers, two male nurses, two female nurses and one doctor broke into her flat. The examination resulted in the compulsory psychiatric examination report of 1 November 2013. According to the information received from the author, the order for the examination came two days after the examination took place. The author did not provide more information in this regard. 3