CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 14 février 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s88A92475 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sDD165512 { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s7CB9076 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s48E1953 { width:187.27pt; display:inline-block } .sA2E62387 { width:204.97pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .sE3D66594 { border:0.75pt solid #000000; border-collapse:collapse } .s94FF4627 { height:63.3pt } .s7E0F3F91 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#a0a0a0 } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s3C2CFC22 { border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#a0a0a0 } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .s684B547D { border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#a0a0a0 } .s59A5D7A { height:25.55pt } .sB30C44B0 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s23463B75 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .sB673203C { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .sA22BE2CE { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .sED1A34C5 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; border-bottom-style:solid; border-bottom-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .sF844B0A7 { height:15.15pt } .sA678F94A { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right; font-size:11pt } .sEBB5D88E { height:63.65pt } .sC465E8B1 { height:42.3pt } .sF2EF8B01 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:11pt } .s546C9D04 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s78B6B604 { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-right-style:solid; border-right-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } .sCEE978D { border-top-style:solid; border-top-width:0.75pt; border-left-style:solid; border-left-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt } FIFTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 5783/10 Drago PEČKO against Slovenia and 9 other applications (see list appended) The European Court of Human Rights (Fifth Section), sitting on 14   February 2012 as a Committee composed of:   Ann Power-Forde, President,   Boštjan M. Zupančič,   Angelika Nußberger, judges, and Stephen Phillips, Deputy Section Registrar, Having regard to the above applications lodged on the dates indicated in the attached table, Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants, Having deliberated, decides as follows: THE FACTS The applicants Mr Drago Pečko, Mr Zoran Benić, Mr Anđelko Vardič, Mr Danijel Bekš, Mr Enis Bajić, Mr Matjaž Jusič, Mr Miroslav Adler, Mr   Marko Kos and Mr Damijan Kranjec are Slovenian nationals. Mr Elvir Šabotić is a Montenegrin national. Their birthdates are indicated in the attached table. They were represented before the Court by Odvetniška Družba Matoz o.p. d.o.o., a law firm practicing in Koper. The Slovenian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Mrs   T.   Mihelič Žitko, State Attorney. The Montenegrin Government had been informed of their right to intervene in the case of Mr Šabotić (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 1 of the Rules of Court), however they did not avail themselves of that right. The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. The applicants served, or are currently serving, sentences in the closed section of Dob Prison. As regards the facilities available to the applicants in the cells and common areas, as well as the health care regime in the prison, the conditions imposed on the applicants regarding activities outside the cells and contact with the outside world, see the Court’s decision in the case of Lalić and Others v. Slovenia (dec.), nos. 5711/10, 5719/10, 5754/10, 5803/10, 5956/10, 5958/10, 5987/10, 6091/10, 6647/10 and 6893/10, 27   September 2011. The individual circumstances, such as period of imprisonment, personal space allocated to the each applicant and their activities outside the cells, are indicated in the attached table. COMPLAINTS The applicants complained that the conditions of their detention in Dob Prison amounted to a violation of Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. In particular, they complained of severe overcrowding, which had led to a lack of personal space, poor sanitary conditions and inadequate ventilation, as well as excessive restrictions on time spent outside the cell, high temperatures in the cells, inadequate health care and psychological assistance, inadequate measures as regards the rehabilitation of drug addicts, and exposure to violence from other inmates owing to insufficient prison security. They further submitted that the situation amounted to a structural problem, which had been acknowledged by the domestic authorities. Invoking Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention, the applicants also complained of restrictions on visits, telephone conversations and correspondence. The applicants lastly complained, under Article 13, that they did not have any effective remedy at their disposal as regards their complaints under Articles 3 and 8 of the Convention. THE LAW Given that the present applications concern a similar subject-matter, the Court decides to join them (Rule 42 § 1 of the Rules of Court). The Court notes that the applicants’ complaints are identical to those of the applicants in the case of Lalić and Others (cited above). In that case the Court has found the general conditions of detention in the closed section of Dob Prison, including the medical and psychological care provided to the prisoners held therein, as well as the arrangements concerning security measures, and the restrictions on maintaining contact with people outside the prison to be adequate vis-à-vis the Convention standards. It has accordingly also rejected the applicants’ complaint under Article 13 of the Convention, as no arguable claim for the purpose of the aforementioned provision could have been established. The Court takes note of the similar factual background of the aforementioned case and the present applications, including the fact that the present applicants always had sufficient personal space in the cells in which they were detained. Therefore, the present applications should be rejected as being manifestly ill-founded pursuant to Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court unanimously Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Stephen Phillips   Ann Power-Forde Deputy Registrar   President No Application No Applicant’s name and date of birth Lodged on Period of imprisonment Cell size/occupancy level (personal space) Out-of-cell activities 1. 5783/10 Drago PEČKO 25/12/1957   18/12/2009 Since 19/01/2009   59,89 m²/16 (3,74 m²) 33,23 m²/4 (8,30 m²) Since 30/03/2009 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute (agricultural activities and metalwork). 2. 5787/10 Zoran BENIĆ 29/11/1975   24/12/2009 Since 14/02/2008 58,94m²/15 (3,93m²) 32,22 m² - 32,39 m²/4 (8,06 m² - 8,09 m²) 59,25 m²/16 (3,70 m²) 59,25m²/14 (4,23 m²)   Since 01/12/2008 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. Since November 2008 he has been included in the secondary education programme, including food-preparation classes. 3. 5798/10 Anđelko VARDIČ 26/01/1971 18/12/2009 From 14/06/2007 to 09/02/2010 59,57 m²/17 (3,50 m²) 32,80 m²/4 (8,20 m²) 24,40 m²/4 (6,10 m²) From 15/09/2008 to 01/10/2009 he attended work therapy sessions. 4. 5801/10 Danijel BEKŠ 05/08/1963   18/12/2009 Since 14/10/2006 59,57 m²/17 (3,50 m²) 59,25 m²/16 (3,70 m²)   From 23/04/2007 to 07/04/2009 he worked in the Pohorje Public Institute. Since 01/02/2010 he has been included in the secondary education programme, including food-preparation classes.   5. 5804/10 Enis BAJIĆ 11/03/1976   18/12/2009 Since 30/04/2007 59,25 m²/16 (3,70 m²) 16,82 m²/4 (4,20 m²) Since 24/09/2007 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. 6. 5807/10 Elvir ŠABOTIĆ 13/07/1975   18/12/2009 From 22/09/2005 to 01/03/2010 15,83 m² - 17,96 m²/3 (5,28 m² - 5,99 m²) 59,25 m²/11 (5,39 m²) 7,14 m² - 7,39 m²/1 (7,14 m² - 7,39 m²) 59,89 m²/16 (3,74 m²) From 21/02/2006 to 26/02/2010 he worked in the Pohorje Public Institute. 7. 5811/10 Matjaž JUSIČ 13/08/1958   18/12/2009 Since 04/06/2007 58,94m²/17 (3,47m²)   Since 23/09/2007 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. 8. 5814/10 Miroslav ADLER 06/03/1977   18/12/2009 Since 21/01/2008 59,89 m²/15 (3,99 m²) 59,25 m²/11 (5,39 m²) 12,92 m²/2 (6,46 m²)   He worked in the Pohorje Public Institute. 9. 5823/10 Marko KOS 15/08/1966   18/12/2009 Since 28/04/2006 59,89 m²/14 (4,28 m²) 13,99 m²/3 (4,66 m²)   Since 03/05/2010 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. 10. 5827/10 Damijan KRANJEC 12/02/1981   18/12/2009 Since 09/03/2009 59,57 m²/17 (3,50 m²)     Since 05/10/2009 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute.