CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 26 juillet 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sB9D5CABB { width:28.35pt; display:inline-block } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s79DE5897 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:17.85pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.85pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s34D46E87 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .sBB355983 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:10pt } .s583D00FA { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:17pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-17pt } .s26FF04E7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:17.3pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4B243ECC { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF7A4323 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s7AF9E746 { width:20.69pt; display:inline-block } .sC7BF4101 { width:166.26pt; display:inline-block } .s5B081A9D { width:168.28pt; display:inline-block } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sCC22C24E { font-family:Arial; color:#3e3e3e } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s26725EEE { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; font-weight:bold; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s4F2ADFDB { text-align:center; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sBB6163A7 { width:2.48pt; font:7pt 'Times New Roman'; display:inline-block } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .s85646119 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:12pt } .sB853CD26 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt } .sE6E2B3B2 { text-align:justify; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; list-style-position:inside } .sF00A2B95 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 }       FOURTH SECTION             CASE OF ȘERBAN AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA   (Application no. 1570/15 and 11 others - see appended list )                             JUDGMENT       STRASBOURG   26 July 2018       This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision. In the case of Șerban and Others v. Romania, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,   Georges Ravarani,   Marko Bošnjak, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 5 July 2018, 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 applications were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”). 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 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. 1570/15 and 14619/15, the Government raised a preliminary objection of failure to comply with the six-month time ‑ limit claiming that the parts of the applicants’ complaints concerning the initial period of their detention had been lodged out of time. 8.     The Court observes that the applicant’s complaint in application no.   1570/15, concerning the initial period of his detention which was terminated by his transfer on 31 March 2011 to penitentiary facilities in respect of which he did not raise any complaint, was submitted to the Court more than two years later, on 17 March 2015. 9.     The Court further notes that the applicant’s complaint in application no.   14619/15 concerning the initial period of his detention which was terminated by his transfer on 29 May 2012 to penitentiary facilities in respect of which he did not raise any complaint, was submitted to the Court more than three years later, on 23 June 2015. 10.     In both instances these parts of the applicants’ complaints were thus raised more than six months after the respective detention period had ended. Accordingly, the Court accepts the Government’s objection and finds that these parts of the applications nos. 1570/15 and 14619/15 have been introduced out of time and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention. 11.     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   ‑ 141, and Ananyev and   Others v. Russia , nos.   42525/07 and 60800/08, §§   149 ‑ 159, 10   January 2012). 12.     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. 13.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, as well as the Government’s objection concerning the continuous situations of the applicants’ conditions of detention in some of the cases, 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, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate. 14.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention. III.     REMAINING COMPLAINTS 15.     In applications nos. 13231/15 and 13821/15, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention relating to the conditions of their detention. 16.     Having examined the applications, the Court 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. III.     APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 17.     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.” 18.     Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania, nos.   61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table. 19.     The Court 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 periods of inadequate conditions of detention as set out in the appended table admissible, and the remainder of the applications nos. 1570/15, 13231/15, 13821/15 and   14619/15 inadmissible;   3.     Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;   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 26 July 2018, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Liv Tigerstedt   Vincent A. De Gaetano 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 name Date of birth Representative name and location Facility Start and end date Duration Sq. m. per inmate Specific grievances Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]     1570/15 17/03/2015 Florin Șerban 26/04/1981     Târgu-Jiu and Colibaşi Prisons 06/02/2014 pending More than 4   years and 3   months and 25   days 1.04-3.8 m² overcrowding (save for the periods of 24/02/2014-11/03/2014 and from 27/06/2014-18/07/2014 in Colibaşi Prison), insufficient sanitary facilities, lack of furniture, lack of natural light and constant artificial light, lack of fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   3,000     2516/15 20/04/2015 Constantin-Emil Barbu 10/12/1984 Sorina Simionescu Iași Iaşi Police Arrest 09/05/2006 to 01/06/2006 24 days   Iaşi Police Section 02/06/2006 to 06/06/2006 5 days   Iaşi Prison 06/06/2006 to 02/07/2015 More than 9   years and 27   days 1.54 m²       2.11 m²       1.21 – 1.99   m² overcrowding, lack of artificial lighting and adequate ventilation, lack of a toilet in the cell, insufficient access to showers   overcrowding, lack of artificial lighting and adequate ventilation, lack of a toilet in the cell, insufficient access to showers   overcrowding, inadequate toilets (insufficiently separated from the cell, lacking a shower, insalubrious, broken and infested with rats), insufficient access to warm water, lack of an adequate space to serve meals, to store goods and food, lack of adequate lighting, mould on walls, cells infested with bedbugs and sometimes with rats and lice, unhygienic conditions for serving meals, poor quality of food, lack of adequate furniture in the cell 5,000     13231/15 06/03/2015 David Leontin Popescu 16/09/1983     Timiş Police Arrest 22/01/2014 to 26/03/2014 2 months and 5   days   Dolj Police Arrest 26/03/2014 to 27/03/2014 2 days   Timișoara Prison 27/03/2014 to 11/09/2014 5 months and 16   days     Craiova Prison 25/09/2014 to 15/01/2015 3 months and 22   days 3.41 m²       4.71 m²       2.38 m²         1.66- 1.71 m² infestation of cell with insects/rodents, infestation of toilet with insects/rodents, insufficient sanitary facilities, lack or inadequate furniture   lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to toilet       overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to warm water, no or restricted access to potable water, poor quality of food   overcrowding, limited access to warm water, lack of adequate heating during winter, insufficient access to walks outside the cell   1,000     13821/15 10/03/2015 Jean Andrei Siminel 02/09/1984     Timişoara Prison 27/03/2014 to 11/09/2014 5 months and 16   days     Craiova Prison 02/10/2014 to 08/12/2014 2 months and 7   days     Craiova Prison 05/01/2015 to 15/01/2015 11 days       Craiova Prison 01/02/2016 pending More than 2 years and 4 months and 18 days   2.63 m²         1.61 m²         1.12 m²           1.52 m²   overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, inadequate temperature, lack or inadequate furniture, lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to warm water   overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, inadequate temperature, no or restricted access to warm water   overcrowding, inadequate toilet facilities, infested with rats, small courtyard for walking outside the cell, worn ‑ out bedroll, lack of adequate heating, lack of an adequate place to dry clothes     overcrowding, inadequate toilet facilities, infested with rats, small courtyard for walking outside the cell, worn-out bedroll, lack of adequate heating, lack of an adequate place to dry clothes 3,000     14235/15 29/04/2015 Radu Mircea Hîrnagea 21/03/1988     Iaşi Prison 29/06/2007 to 21/07/2016 9   years and 23   days 1.28-1.34 m² overcrowding, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water   5,000     14619/15 23/06/2015 Adrian Lepădatu 01/07/1985     Galaţi Prison 19/10/2012 pending More than 5   years and 5   months and 17   days   2.4 m² overcrowding, lack or inadequate furniture, lack or inadequate hygienic facilities 5,000     23682/15 21/09/2015 Paul-Robert Albert 16/05/1981     Miercurea-Ciuc Prison 15/03/2013 to 10/03/2017 3 years and 11   months and 24 days   1.5-2.7 m² overcrowding, insufficient sanitary facilities, lack of natural light, lack of furniture 3,000     53679/15 20/10/2015 Anca Maria Andrieș Ursu 24/05/1968 Valentin Calotă Braşov Brașov Police Arrest 16/12/2014 to 17/03/2015 3 months and 2 days   30/03/2015 to 03/04/2015 5 days     Târgșor Prison 17/03/2015 – 30/03/2015 14 days     03/04/2015 pending More than 3 years and 1 month and 30   days   4.23-4.28m 2                 1.57-1.99 m² lack of fresh air, inadequate sanitary facilities, infestation of the cell with insects, poor conditions of hygiene               overcrowding, insalubrious sanitary facilities, infestation of the cell with insects, poor conditions of hygiene, lack of fresh air, lack or insufficient natural light, poor quality of food, lack of a place to store goods   3,000     12979/16   19/04/2016 Ion-Daniel Bănulescu 16/05/1978     Mărgineni Prison 29/01/2015 to 28/02/2017 2 years and 2 months   1.5-1.67 m² overcrowding, bunk beds, lack of natural light and fresh air, insufficient sanitary facilities, lack of furniture, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   3,000   38590/16 21/07/2016 Marian Tănase 30/07/1963 Irina Maria Peter Bucharest Bucharest Police Section no.   12, Rahova and Giurgiu Prisons 27/05/2014 pending More than 3 years and 11   months and 1   day 1.96 – 5.44 m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 06/07/2016-09/01/2017, 06/02/2017-09/02/2017 and 17/02/2017-26/06/2017 in Giurgiu Prison), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food 3,000   59929/16 07/10/2016 Emanuel Hogea 22/09/1985 Ionela Mărgărit Bucharest Focșani, Galați and Brăila Prisons 04/04/2016 to 15/12/2017 1 year and 8   months and 12   days 1-6.18 m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 12/08/2016-02/09/2016, 16/09/2016-30/09/2016, 28/10/2016-08/11/2016, 15/11/2016-08/12/2016 in Focșani Prison), insufficient sanitary facilities, insects and rats, lack of potable running water, limited access to running water in Galați Prison, lack of furniture, lack of natural light and fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air       3,000   68839/16 14/12/2016 Aurelian Dicu 02/02/1969 Irina Maria Peter Bucharest Bucharest Police Section No. 15, Jilava, Rahova, Giurgiu Prisons 04/12/2001 to 18/10/2016 14 years and 10   months and 15   days 1-5.44 m² overcrowding (save for the periods in Rahova Prison from 17/01/2007-25/04/2007, 28/05/2007-21/01/2009 and in Giurgiu Prison from 19/02/2012-06/07/2012, 20/08/2014-18/10/2016), lack or inadequate furniture, lack of privacy for toilet, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, insufficient number of sleeping places, no or restricted access to warm water 5,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.