Last Updated on October 27, 2022 by LawEuro
The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention.
FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF VITAN AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 31956/16 and 9 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
27 October 2022
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Vitanand 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 6 October 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. 31956/16, 32390/16, 44729/16, 51383/16, 67896/16, 21069/19 and 63585/19, 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. 31956/16, 32390/16, 44729/16, 51383/16, 67896/16, 21069/19 and 63585/19 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, Muršićv. 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 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. 31956/16, 44729/16, 67896/16 and 63585/19, 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 sumsindicated 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 27 October 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. | 31956/16 11/08/2016 |
Wilhelm VITAN 1969 |
Irina Maria Peter Bucharest |
Gherla Prison 28/10/2015 to 19/11/2015 23 day(s) Gherla Prison 08/12/2015 to 14/12/2015 7 day(s) Gherla Prison 23/12/2015 to 04/02/2016 1 month(s) and 13 day(s) Gherla Prison 09/02/2016 to 15/02/2016 7 day(s) |
– | inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents | 312 days in compensation for a total period of 1,579 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 23/01/2018, including all the periods spent in the detention facilities he complained of except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5 | 1,000 |
| 2. | 32390/16 13/07/2016 |
Sandu NEAGU 1978 |
Brăila, Iași, Bucharest – Rahova, Constanța – PoartaAlbă, Galați and Giurgiu Prisons; Bucharest – Jilava, TârguOcna and Constanța – PoartaAlbă Prison Hospitals 29/01/2003 to 23/07/2012 9 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 25 day(s) Brăila Prison 23/12/2019 pending More than 2 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 21 day(s) |
1.29 – 2.90 m² | overcrowding (save for the periods 25/10/2005 – 15/02/2006, 01/06/2006 – 25/09/2007, 02/06/2009 – 09/06/2009 and 06/10/2009 – 09/10/2009), lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet |
540 days in compensation for a total period of 2,700 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 22/12/2019 | 5,000 | |
| 3. | 44729/16 20/07/2016 |
Ruben-Ovidiu POPA (formerFALIBAC) 1960 |
Bucharest – Rahova Prison Hospital 27/10/2015 to 30/10/2015 4 day(s) MiercureaCiuc and Craiova Prisons 22/02/2016 to 23/03/2016 1 month(s) and 2 day(s) Mioveni Prison Hospital, Arad and Craiova Prisons11/04/2016 to 15/03/2018 1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 5 day(s)
Mioveni and Bucharest – Jilava Prisons, Mioveni and Dej Prison Hospitals 7 periods between 17/05/2018 and 01/02/2022 in the total amount of 5 month(s) and 10 day(s) |
2.64 m²
|
overcrowding (save for the period
26/01/2022 – 01/02/2022), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light
|
144 days in compensation for a total period of 734 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 23/07/2015 to 22/12/2019, including all the periods spent in the detention facilities he complained of except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5 | 3,000 | |
| 4. | 51383/16
30/01/2017 |
Florin-Cristinel IVĂȘCANU
1994 |
|
Mehedinți County Police Station
23/01/2016 to 18/02/2016 27 day(s)
Craiova Prison 04/04/2016 to 07/04/2016 4 day(s)
Craiova Prison 05/01/2017 to 10/01/2017 6 day(s)
Craiova Prison 31/01/2017 to 08/02/2017 9 day(s) |
1.53 – 2 m²
|
overcrowding, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to warm water
|
198 days in compensation for a total period of 1,000 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 18/02/2016 to 04/12/2018 spent in Drobeta‑Turnu Severin and Craiova Prisons, except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5 | 1,000 |
| 5. | 58177/16
08/09/2016 |
Marius-Bogdan NEJLOVEANU
1987 |
|
Bucharest – Jilava and Târgu Jiu Prisons
23/12/2019 to 06/08/2021 1 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 15 day(s)
Târgu Jiu Prison 10/08/2021 to 26/01/2022 5 month(s) and 17 day(s) |
1.5 – 2 m²
|
overcrowding (save for the periods 23/12/2019 – 03/09/2020 and 04/02/2021 – 18/02/2021), lack of privacy for toilet, lack of fresh air, lack or inadequate furniture, infestation of cell with insects/rodents
|
3,000 | |
| 6. | 67896/16
14/11/2016 |
Florin-Alexandru FILIP
1985 |
Petru-Sorin Crudiu
Drobeta-Turnu Severin |
Timiș County Police Station; Arad and Bucharest – Rahova Prisons
15/03/2010 to 17/10/2018 8 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 3 day(s)
Timișoara Prison 23/12/2019 to 09/10/2020 9 month(s) and 17 day(s)
Timișoara Prison 22/10/2020 pending More than 1 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 22 day(s) |
2 – 2.79 m²
|
overcrowding (save for the periods 25/03/2010 – 10/01/2011, 17/01/2011 – 20/06/2011, 22/11/2011 – 17/01/2013), poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient natural light
|
78 days in compensation for a total period of 416 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 17/10/2018 to 22/12/2019 in Timișoara and
Bucharest – Jilava Prisons, except for short periods spent in transit rooms |
5,000 |
| 7. | 75814/16
29/12/2016 |
Harry ÖTVÖS
1978 |
|
Codlea Prison
23/12/2019 to 16/01/2020 25 day(s)
Codlea and Timișoara Prisons 30/01/2020 to 21/12/2020 10 month(s) and 22 day(s) Timișoara and Codlea Prisons 11/01/2021 to 20/05/2021 4 month(s) and 10 day(s)
Codlea Prison 04/06/2021 to 06/09/2021 3 month(s) and 3 day(s)
Codlea Prison 10/09/2021 pending More than 1 year(s) and 3 day(s) |
1.93 – 2.94 m²
|
overcrowding (save for the periods 30/01/2020 – 13/02/2020, 01/09/2021 – 06/09/2021 and 13/09/2021 – 05/01/2022), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water
|
3,000 | |
| 8. | 21031/18
24/04/2018 |
Tiberiu BUDAI
1984 |
|
Arad and Timișoara Prisons
22/06/2017 to 02/03/2022 4 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 9 day(s) |
2.04 – 2.70 m² | overcrowding (save for the periods 22/06/2017 – 25/08/2020 and 22/09/2020 – 13/08/2021), lack or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, poor quality of food | 3,000 | |
| 9. | 21069/19
03/04/2019 |
Alin NOVAC
1985 |
|
Botoșani Prison
28 periods between 07/01/2014 and 25/07/2017 in the total amount of 4 years(s) and 8 month(s) and 5 day(s)
|
1.90 – 2.85 m²
|
overcrowding (save for the period 01/11/2016 – 22/12/2016), lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water, inadequate temperature | 354 days in compensation for a total period of 1,790 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 22/12/2019, including the periods spent in Botoșani Prison except for the periods in column no. 5 | 3,000 |
| 10. | 63585/19
16/01/2020 |
Constantin-Cristi POPA
1989 |
|
Mioveni Prison
23/12/2019 to 24/02/2020 2 month(s) and 2 day(s) |
2.59 – 2.64 m² | overcrowding (save for the period 04/02/2020 – 24/02/2020), lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell | 186 days in compensation for a total period of 957 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 21/04/2017 to 22/12/2019 in Mioveni and Târgu Jiu Prisons, except for the days spent in prison hospitals, infirmary, and transit rooms | 1,000 |
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Leave a Reply