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 } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s75A32C27 { 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 } .sF00A2B95 { font-family:Arial; font-size:5.33pt; vertical-align:super } .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 DUMITRESCU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA   (Application no. 66551/14 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 Dumitrescu 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 application no. 35104/15, the Government raised the preliminary objection of non-compliance with the six-month time-limit rule, arguing that the applicant’s complaint regarding his initial detention was lodged out of time. 8.     The Court observes that in application no. 35104/15 the applicant’s complaint regarding his detention from 20 June 2001 to 21   January   2010, which ceased on the latter date by his transfer to another detention facility in respect of which he did not raise any complaint, was lodged with the Court on 3 August 2015, that is, more than six months after the transfer. 9.     Therefore, the Court accepts the Government’s preliminary objection and finds that this part of application no. 35104/15 was lodged outside the six-month time-limit and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §§   1 and 4 of the Convention. 10.     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 Penitentiary 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). 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, as well as the Government’s objection concerning the continuous situations of the applicants’ condition 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. 13.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention. III.     REMAINING COMPLAINTS 14.     In applications nos. 66551/14 and 37381/15, the applicants also complained under Article 3 of the Convention about the inadequate conditions of detention in prison from 31 July 2014 to 6 April 2016 and 28   March 2006 to 29 August 2013, respectively. 15.     The Court has examined the applications 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, the 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 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. 18.     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 regarding inadequate conditions of detention, as set out in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of the applications nos. 66551/14 (detention period after 31   July   2014), 35104/15 (detention period prior to 21 January 2010) and 37381/15 (detention period prior to 29 August 2013) inadmissible;   3.     Holds that these applications disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, as set out in the appended table;   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]       66551/14 24/09/2014 Laurențiu-Alin Dumitrescu 20/12/1971 Relia Constantinescu Craiova Pelendava Penitentiary 06/05/2014 to 30/07/2014 2 months and 25 days   2.06-2.15m² overcrowding 1,000     27195/15 31/07/2015 Dan Andrei 05/01/1990 Mariana Andrei Bucharest Bucharest 9 th Police Section       Jilava Penitentiary           Rahova Penitentiary       Giurgiu Penitentiary       Colibași Penitentiary 15/06/2008 – pending More than 9 years, 11 months, 14 days 2 m²       1.28-2.99m²           1.95-2.04m²       3.74m 2       2.29-2.92m² overcrowding, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of dining facilities   overcrowding, bunk beds, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of dining facilities   overcrowding, poor quality of food, lack of dining facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents   poor quality of food, lack of dining facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents   overcrowding (save for the periods from 19/04/2012 to 10/05/2012, 23/08/2012 to 31/08/2012, 03/07/2013 to 24/10/2013), poor quality of food, bunk beds, lack of dining facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents   5,000     30264/15 15/07/2015 Dumitru-Cristian Grădinaru 17/10/1979   Timișoara Penitentiary         Jilava Penitentiary     Jilava Penitentiary Hospital     Arad Penitentiary 19/08/2003- pending More than 14 years, 9 months, 12 days 1.71-2.99m²         1.12-1.28m²     3.78m 2     3.84-7.68m 2 overcrowding, lack of storing facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell   infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell   lack of storing facilities, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, cell used as a shoes working point   5,000     34061/15 03/08/2015 Silviu-Mihai Mailat 10/05/1989   Miercurea Ciuc Penitentiary 03/06/2013 to 19/09/2015 2 years and 3 months and 17 days 0.81-2.06m² overcrowding, bunk beds, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, lack of toiletries, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of storing facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen   3,000     35104/15 03/08/2015 Ciprian Drugă 05/06/1979 Ramona Lungu   Odobești Penitentiaries of Bacău, Iași, Vaslui, Galați, Colibași, Tulcea, Chilia, Brăila and Focșani 07/05/2010 – pending More than 8 years and 19 days 1.26-2.61m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 08/08/2013 to 22/08/2013 and 19/05/2015 to 07/07/2015), no or restricted access to shower, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of storing facilities   5,000     37381/15 21/08/2015 Florin Gîju 24/12/1988   Tulcea Penitentiary 24/07/2014 – pending More than 3 years and 10 months and 1 day   1.6 m² overcrowding, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of dining facilities 3,000     41508/15 12/02/2016 Florentin Soltan 22/11/1978 Irina Maria Peter Bucharest Penitentiaries of Codlea, Rahova and Jilava 23/10/2014 to 05/09/2017 2 years and 10 months and 14 days 1.46-2.95m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 02/06/2015 to 08/01/2016 and 25/10/2016 to 05/09/2017), bunk beds, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food, lack or inadequate furniture, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   3,000     42998/15 13/04/2016 Gabriel Nichelciuc 25/06/1959   Prahova County Police Inspectorate, Penitentiaries Hospital of Jilava, Colibași and Rahova and Penitentiaries of Ploiești, Mărgineni, Iași and Găești 30/06/2002 to 06/09/2017 15 years and 2 months and 8 days 1.28-2.14m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 01/02/2011 to 08/02/2011, 25/02/2011 to 03/03/2011 and 19/04/2013 to 06/09/2017), insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to shower, lack of toiletries, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to potable water   5,000     45945/15 08/10/2015 Emil-Gheorghe-Ilie Adam 20/07/1970   Alba Police Inspectorate and Penitentiaries of Aiud, Arad, Târgu Mureș, Gherla, Jilava, Rahova and Colibași 28/01/2001 to 17/08/2017 16 years and 6 months and 21 days 1.06-2.9 m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 17/08/2005 to 20/07/2006, 23/01/2007 to 02/03/2007, 15/03/2007 to 21/08/2007, 20/11/2008 to 20/05/2009, 03/09/2010 to 20/12/2010, 03/08/2011 to 15/03/2013, and 20/08/2013 to 15/10/2013), lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack of dining and storing facilities   5,000   50403/15 25/04/2016 Elena Stoian 16/02/1963 Sorin Gabriel Stoian Olteni Penitentiaries of Craiova, Colibași and Gherla 26/06/2014 to 11/01/2017 2 years and 6 months and 17 days 0.87-2.97m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 23/07/2014 to 11/08/2014, 15/09/2014 to 18/09/2014, 06/10/2014 to 16/10/2014, 10/11/2014 to 20/11/2014, 03/12/2014 to 05/10/2015, 05/11/2015 to 16/11/2015, 08/01/2016 to 30/06/2016, 14/07/2016 to 28/07/2016, 01/09/2016 to 08/09/2016 and 10/10/2016 to 13/10/2016), bunk beds, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, inadequate temperature, poor quality of food, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   3,000   58498/15 21/07/2016 Marian Gorgan 30/03/1984 Ionela Mărgărit Bucharest Penitentiaries of Galați and Brăila 05/05/2014 to 21/03/2017 2 years and 10 months and 17 days 1.6-2.53m² overcrowding (save for the periods from 05/05/2015 to 13/05/2015, 17/09/2015 to 08/12/2015 and 11/03/2016 to 21/03/2017), bunk beds, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to warm water, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   3,000   62851/15 01/03/2016 Florin Surugiu 18/03/1981   Bucharest 12 th and 15 th Police Sections 30/04/2010 to 06/07/2010 2 months and 7 days             Penitentiaries of Rahova, Giurgiu, Slobozia, Gherla, Bistrița and Jilava 06/07/2010 to 29/07/2016 6 years and 24 days 2.75 m²                   1.11-2.79 m² overcrowding (Bucharest 12 th Police Section), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food, lack or insufficient quantity of food, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air   overcrowding (save for the periods from 11/03/2011 to 18/04/2011, 20/04/2011 to 25/05/2011, 22/06/2012 to 16/05/2013, 04/06/2013 to 10/06/2013), lack of or insufficient natural light, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, mouldy or dirty cell, lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, no or restricted access to shower   5,000   [1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.