MAKARATZIS v. GREECE JUDGMENT 33 78. Having regard to the above considerations, the Court concludes that the authorities failed to carry out an effective investigation into the incident. The incomplete and inadequate character of the investigation is highlighted by the fact that, even before the Court, the Government were unable to identify all the officers who were involved in the shooting and wounding of the applicant. 79. There has accordingly been a violation of Article 2 of the Convention in that respect. 5. Alleged practice of the authorities of failing to comply with their procedural obligations under Article 2 of the Convention 80. Having regard to its findings above (see paragraphs 72 and 79), the Court does not find it necessary to determine whether the failings identified in this case are part of a practice adopted by the authorities, as asserted by the applicant (see paragraph 37 above). II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION 81. The applicant complained that he had been the victim of serious bodily harm, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, which stipulates: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” 82. The Government maintained that the applicant’s injuries were accidental and regrettable consequences of a lawful arrest. 83. In view of the grounds on which it has found a dual violation of Article 2 of the Convention (see paragraphs 46 to 79 above), the Court considers that no separate issue arises under Article 3 of the Convention. III. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 13 OF THE CONVENTION 84. The applicant complained that he had not had an effective remedy within the meaning of Article 13 of the Convention, which stipulates: “Everyone whose rights and freedoms as set forth in [the] Convention are violated shall have an effective remedy before a national authority notwithstanding that the violation has been committed by persons acting in an official capacity.” 85. The Government did not address this allegation other than to assert the availability of remedies at the domestic level to redress the applicant’s grievances. 86. In view of the submissions of the applicant in the present case and of the grounds on which it has found a violation of Article 2 in relation to its procedural aspect (see paragraphs 73 to 79 above), the Court considers that no separate issue arises under Article 13 of the Convention.