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 } .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 } .s453A6D70 { height:48.85pt } .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 } .sC0A1A6CD { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .sC3AB69A { border-style:solid; border-width:0.75pt; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s2637CC02 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .s2342A031 { 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; vertical-align:top } .s80190776 { height:57.4pt } .sF33A6D70 { height:45.95pt } .sF844B0A7 { height:15.15pt } .s11C56D70 { height:43.65pt } .sC465E8B1 { height:42.3pt } .sEDC5336B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:12pt } .s643A6CC2 { height:50pt } .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 } .s40B7A780 { 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; vertical-align:top } .s4F2EDFF { 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; vertical-align:top } FIFTH SECTION DECISION AS TO THE ADMISSIBILITY OF Application no. 5939/10 Goran ĐURKOVIĆ 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 Goran Đurković, Mr Miloš Zogović, Mr Duško Cvijanović, Mr Alojz Polajšer, Mr Matej Kumin, Mr Aleš Erjavec, Mr Zeni Demiri, Mr Marjan Zupanič and Mr Iztok Nilić are Slovenian nationals. Mr   Franjo Ivanušić is a Croatian national. Their birthdates are indicated in the attached table. They were represented before the Court by Odvetniška Drużba 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 Croatian Government, having been informed of their right to intervene in the case of Mr Ivanušić (Article 36 § 1 of the Convention and Rule 44 § 1 of the Rules of Court), stated in a letter of 07 September 2010 that they did not wish to 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. 5939/10 Goran ĐURKOVIĆ 15/05/1979 08/01/2010 From 11/08/2009 to 07/10/2010   59,57 m²/17 (3,50 m²) 12,67 m²/2 (6,33 m²) /   2. 5940/10 Miloš ZOGOVIĆ 11/06/1979   08/01/2010 Since 23/02/2006 59,25 m²/15 (3,95 m²) 32,22 m² - 32,39 m²/4 (8,06 m² - 8,09 m²) 59,25 m²/16 (3,70 m²)   Since 11/12/2008 he has been attending work therapy sessions. Since 2006 he has been included in the primary education programme.   3. 5941/10 Duško CVIJANOVIĆ 11/10/1973   08/01/2010 From 04/03/2008 to 31/12/2009 59,89 m²/16 (3,74 m²) 32,39 m²/3 (10,79 m²) 59,25 m²/16 (3,70 m²)   /   4. 5952/10 Franjo IVANUŠIČ 13/03/1961   08/01/2010 From 19/07/2007 to 23/06/2010 59,89 m²/16 (3,74 m²) 16,47 m²/3 (5,49 m²)   From 01/10/2007 to 23/06/2010 he worked in the Pohorje Public Institute. 5. 5964/10 Alojz POLAJŠER 15/10/1957   18/12/2009   From 29/01/2008 to 01/06/2010 59,25 m²/15 (3,95 m²) 33,23 m²/4 (8,31 m²)   / 6. 5970/10 Matej KUMIN 03/01/1983   18/12/2009 Since 15/02/2005 59,89m²/14 (4,28m²) 14,20 m²/3 (4,73m²) Since 11/04/2005 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. From 06/10/2005 to 09/07/2009 he was included in the secondary education programme, including food-preparation. 7. 5973/10 Aleš ERJAVEC 01/11/1976 08/01/2010 Since 30/03/2009 59,25 m²/15 (3,95 m²)   Since 05/10/2009 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. 8. 5974/10 Zeni DEMIRI 01/04/1965   18/12/2009 Since 26/10/2008 58,94m²/14 (4,21m²) Since 02/08/2009 he has been working in the kitchen of Dob prison. He has been included in the secondary education programme. 9. 5980/10 Marjan ZUPANIČ 11/07/1966 18/12/2009 Since 27/11/2006 58,94m²/17 (3,47m²) Since 08/01/2007 he has been working in the Pohorje Public Institute. 10. 5988/10 Iztok NILIČ 28/08/1977   18/12/2009 From 08/05/2008 to 30/01/2010 59,25 m²/15 (3,95 m²) 59,89m²/14 (4,28m²) He was included in the secondary education programme for catering and touristic technicians.