Last Updated on September 15, 2022 by LawEuro
The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention.
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF BOCA AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 38482/16 and 12 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
15 September 2022
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Boca and Others v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Armen Harutyunyan, President,
Jolien Schukking,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 August 2022,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention.
THE LAW
I. JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
II. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6. The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 3
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
7. In applications nos. 38482/16, 80605/17, 15709/18, 16562/18, 46084/18, 6745/19, 11539/19, 25456/19, 33270/19 and 37140/19, the Government raised a preliminary objection concerning loss of victim status by the applicants for the periods of detention specified in the appended table because they were afforded adequate redress based on Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences for those specific periods of detention.
8. The Court notes that the domestic remedy introduced in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romania and applicable until December 2019 was held to be an effective one in the case of Dîrjan and Ştefan v. Romania ((dec.), nos. 14224/15 and 50977/15, §§ 23-33, 15 April 2020). This remedy was available to the applicants in the present applications, and they were, indeed, afforded adequate redress for certain periods of detention (for details see the appended table).
9. Therefore, the Court accepts the Government’s objection and finds that these parts of applications nos. 38482/16, 80605/17, 15709/18, 16562/18, 46084/18, 6745/19, 11539/19, 25456/19, 33270/19 and 37140/19 are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be declared inadmissible in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
10. Turning to the remaining periods of the applicants’ detention as specified in the appended table, the Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case‑law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96‑101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122‑41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149‑59, 10 January 2012).
11. In the leading case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania (nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
12. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, (including its findings in the recent case of Polgar v Romania, no. 39412/19, §§ 94-97, 20 July 2021), the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention, as described in the appended table, were inadequate.
13. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
III. REMAINING COMPLAINTS
14. In applications nos. 38482/16, 80605/17, 15709/18, 16562/18, 46084/18, 11539/19, 25456/19 and 33270/19, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention.
15. The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
IV. APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
16. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
17. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Rezmiveș and Others, cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
18. The Court further considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,
1. Decides to join the applications;
2. Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, for the periods specified in the appended table, admissible, and the remainder of the applications inadmissible;
3. Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention for the periods specified in the appended table below;
4. Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 15 September 2022, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Armen Harutyunyan
Acting Deputy Registrar President
_____________
APPENDIX
List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention
(inadequate conditions of detention)
| No. | Application no. Date of introduction |
Applicant’s name Year of birth |
Representative’s name and location | Facility Start and end date Duration |
Sq. m per inmate | Specific grievances | Domestic compensation awarded (in days) based on total period calculated by national authorities |
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non‑pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros)[1] |
| 1. | 38482/16 22/06/2016 |
Valentin-Sorin BOCA 1985 |
Nichita-Costescu Cezara-Maria Timișoara |
Arad Prison 12/11/2015 to 21/01/2016 2 month(s) and 10 day(s) Arad Prison 11/02/2016 to 06/10/2016 7 month(s) and 26 day(s) Arad Prison 18/04/2017 to 13/07/2017 2 month(s) and 26 day(s) Arad Prison 31/07/2017 to 12/02/2018 6 month(s) and 13 day(s) Arad Prison 19/03/2018 to 16/04/2018 29 day(s) |
2.40 m² | overcrowding, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food | 90 days in compensation for a total period of 470 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 26/09/2015 to 18/01/2019 in Timișoara and Constanța – Poarta Albă Prisons, except for days spent in transit rooms | 3,000 |
| 2. | 15014/17
16/02/2017 |
Silviu-Constantin AȘTEFĂNOAIE 1989 |
Mărgineni Prison 10/11/2010 to 23/07/2012 1 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 14 day(s) |
1.36 m² | overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, bunk beds | 3,000 | ||
| 3. | 80605/17 23/01/2018 |
George-Valentin OANCEA 1979 |
Mioveni (Colibași) Prison 11/11/2010 to 24/07/2012 1 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 14 day(s) |
1.44 – 2.42 m² | overcrowding, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents | 462 days in compensation for a total period of 2,329 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 08/12/2018 | 3,000 | |
| 4. | 81283/17 23/11/2017 |
Angelo Marius DUMITREAN 1987 |
Iuga Nicoleta Arad |
Arad County Police Station; Arad, Timișoara and Deva (Bârcea Mare) Prisons 13/08/2005 to 24/02/2017 11 year(s) and 6 month(s) and 12 day(s) Focșani Prison 03/03/2017 to 24/05/2017 2 month(s) and 22 day(s) |
1.84 – 2.90 m² | overcrowding (save for the periods 08/11/2005 – 28/11/2005, 31/07/2006 – 03/08/2006, 31/10/2006 – 31/01/2008, 17/09/2008 – 24/11/2010, 05/08/2011 – 09/03/2012, 16/03/2012 – 04/09/2014 and 02/11/2015 – 26/10/2016), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to warm water |
5,000 | |
| 5. | 15709/18 19/06/2018 |
Eugen GUNEA 1987 |
Dej Prison Hospital 25/02/2014 to 13/03/2014 17 day(s) Codlea Prison 16/09/2017 to 25/10/2017 1 month(s) and 10 day(s) Codlea Prison 25/11/2019 to 25/03/2020 4 month(s) and 1 day(s) |
2.16 – 2.96 m² | overcrowding (save for the period 25/11/2019 – 28/11/2019), lack or inadequate furniture, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to warm water, infestation of cell with insects/rodents | 456 days in compensation for a total period of 2,281 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 25/06/2013 to 22/12/2019 in Codlea and Miercurea Ciuc Prisons, except for the days spent in infirmary and the periods indicated in column no. 5 | 1,000 | |
| 6. | 16562/18 23/05/2018 |
Bujor BANCIU 1987 |
Bistrița Prison 23/12/2019 to 23/09/2020 9 month(s) and 1 day(s) Bistrița Prison 02/10/2020 to 10/02/2021 4 month(s) and 9 day(s) |
1.16 m² | overcrowding, poor quality of food, lack of privacy for toilet | 204 days in compensation for a total period of 1,039 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 21/07/2016 to 22/12/2019, including all the periods spent in Sălaj County Police Station, Oradea, Gherla and Bistrița Prisons, except for the days spent in transit rooms | 3,000 | |
| 7. | 46084/18 15/11/2018 |
Ion ȚÎNȚAȘ 1968 |
Gherla and Bucharest – Rahova Prisons 10/11/2009 to 24/07/2012 2 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 15 day(s) |
1.31 – 2.67 m² | overcrowding (save for the period 14/02/2012 – 15/03/2012), lack of or insufficient natural light, bunk beds, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of fresh air | 480 days in compensation for a total period of 2,416 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 19/06/2019, including all the periods spent in the detention facilities he complained of | 3,000 | |
| 8. | 6745/19 14/01/2019 |
Lavinia NEAGOE 1980 |
Bucharest – Rahova and Bucharest – Jilava Prison Hospitals Seven periods from 23/08/2016 to 20/11/2017 for a total of 4 month(s) and 11 day(s) |
no or restricted access to potable water, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, mouldy or dirty cell | 318 days in compensation for a total period of 1,569 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 11/01/2014 to 18/07/2018, including all the periods spent in Ploiești – Târgșorul Nou Prison, except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5 | 1,000 | ||
| 9. | 11539/19 18/02/2019 |
Marian BACIU 1961 |
Mioveni Prison 30/09/2010 to 24/07/2012 1 year(s) and 9 month(s) and 25 day(s) |
1.71 – 2.13 m² | overcrowding, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack or inadequate furniture, poor quality of food | 444 days in compensation for a total period of 2,230 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 18/09/2018, including all the periods spent in Mioveni and Târgu Jiu Prisons | 3,000 | |
| 10. | 25456/19 05/08/2019 |
Dinu-Olimpiu CRACANĂ 1977 |
Baia Mare Prison 23/12/2019 to 12/05/2020 4 month(s) and 20 day(s) |
2.57 – 2.77 m² | overcrowding, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food | 114 days in compensation for a total period of 576 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 03/05/2018 to 22/12/2019 in Gherla and Baia Mare Prisons, except for the days spent in infirmary and transit rooms | 1,000 | |
| 11. | 26700/19 24/07/2019 |
Cosmin PANCU 1979 |
Arad Prison 14/06/2018 to 22/10/2021 3 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 9 day(s) |
– | inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities | 3,000 | ||
| 12. | 33270/19 12/08/2019 |
Gheorghe SAVA 1969 |
Baia Mare Prison 23/12/2019 to 18/02/2020 1 month(s) and 27 day(s) |
2.07 m² | overcrowding | 144 days in compensation for a total period of 725 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 20/11/2017 to 22/12/2019, including all the periods spent in Bucharest – Rahova, Gherla and Baia Mare Prisons, except for days spent in transit rooms | 1,000 | |
| 13. | 37140/19 31/07/2019 |
Marin POSTOLACHE 1982 |
Craiova – Pelendava Prison 27/01/2020 to 28/04/2020 3 month(s) and 2 day(s) |
– | lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to shower, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food | 216 days in compensation for a total period of 1,084 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 07/12/2016 to 22/12/2019, including all the periods spent in Craiova and Craiova – Pelendava Prisons | 1,000 |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Leave a Reply