CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 16 mai 2019

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s598389F8 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:11pt } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s82B4DA5F { page-break-before:right; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s4DAA9627 { width:178.94pt; 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 } .s8BB6D734 { margin-right:9pt; margin-left:9pt; 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 } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sC36A6361 { font-family:Arial; color:#000000 }       FOURTH SECTION         CASE OF VASILIU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA (Applications nos. 46404/15 and 10 others - see appended list )                   JUDGMENT     STRASBOURG   16 May 2019           This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.   In the case of Vasiliu and Others v. Romania, The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:   Georges Ravarani, President,   Marko Bošnjak,   Péter Paczolay, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 25 April 2019, 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.     Notice of the applications was given 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. 46404/15 the Government raised a preliminary objection of non-compliance with the admissibility criteria established by Article 35 § 2 (b) of the Convention, claiming that the applicant’s complaint regarding his initial detention period was lodged out of time. 8.     The Court observes that in application no. 46404/15 the applicant’s complaint regarding his initial detention in Giurgiu Prison, which ceased on 22 March 2012 by his transfer to another prison facility in respect of which he did not raise any complaint, was lodged with the Court on 5   January   2016, that is, more than six months after the transfer. 9.     Therefore, the Court accepts the Government’s objection and finds that this part of application no. 46404/15 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 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). 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 applications. 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 applications are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention. III.     APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 14.     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.” 15.     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. 16.     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 inadequate conditions of detention, as set out in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of application no. 46404/15 inadmissible;   3.     Holds that these applications 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 16 May 2019, pursuant to Rule   77   §§   2 and   3 of the Rules of Court.   Liv Tigerstedt   Georges Ravarani 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 Date of birth   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]     46404/15 05/01/2016 Silviu-Daniel Vasiliu 30/04/1977   Represented by Beatrice-Irina Mănica, Bucharest Giurgiu Prison 22/10/2012 to 29/10/2015 3 year(s) and 8 day(s)     1.67 - 2.67 m² Overcrowding (save for the period 22/10/2012 to 20/10/2014), poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities. 3,000     54423/15 05/02/2016 Marcel Mihai 05/11/1960 Piteşti Police and Colibaşi Prison 10/04/2004 pending More than 14 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 9 day(s) 1.71 - 2.36 m² Overcrowding, lack or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient electric light.   5,000     55601/15 27/11/2015 Aurel Tudorache 05/02/1987 Mărgineni, Iaşi and Arad Prisons 13/07/2010 to 10/08/2016   6 year(s) and 29 day(s)     1.28 - 2.19 m² Overcrowding (save for the period of 23/04/2012 – 10/08/2016 in Arad Prison), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or insufficient natural light. 5,000     58528/15 08/12/2015 Cezar-Mihai Niculescu 13/02/1982 Rahova and Colibaşi Prisons 08/10/2013 to 12/10/2015 2 year(s) and 5 day(s)   1.93 - 2.58 m² Overcrowding 3,000     80/16 13/01/2016 Miklos Berszan 21/12/1943 Codlea Prison 29/01/2014 to 07/06/2016 2 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 10 day(s)   1.22 - 2.26 m² Overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air. 3,000     3574/16 21/03/2016 Constantin Mihai 25/12/1971   Represented by Irina Maria Peter, Bucharest Dolj Police, Craiova and Pelendava Prisons 14/08/2013 to 05/01/2016 2 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 23 day(s) 1.4 - 1.6 m² Overcrowding, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air. 3,000     4234/16 08/02/2016 Adrian Tanţoş 31/01/1985 Bacău Police 21/03/2014 to 24/04/2014 1 month(s) and 4 day(s)     Bacău Prison 24/04/2014 to 14/07/2015 1 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 21 day(s)     Iaşi Prison 14/07/2015 to 02/10/2015 2 month(s) and 19 day(s)             Vaslui Prison 02/10/2015 to 06/07/2016 9 month(s) and 5 day(s) 2.51 m²           1.51 m²             1.28 m²                   2.45 m² Overcrowding, poor quality of food, insufficient number of sleeping places;       Overcrowding, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air, insufficient number of sleeping places, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air;   Overcrowding, poor quality of food, insufficient number of sleeping places, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents;     Overcrowding, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, poor quality of food.   3,000     6468/16 09/03/2016 Mihai-Cătălin Roman 07/03/1988 Braşov Police, Codlea, Mărgineni and Gherla Prisons 18/11/2006 pending More than 12 year(s) and 4   month(s) and 2 day(s) 1.54 - 2.83 m² Overcrowding (save for the periods of 04/12/2013 -16/06/2014, 11/03 -27/06/2016, 05/10/2016 - 06/04/2017), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate furniture, infestation of cell with insects/rodents.   5,000     8611/16 03/02/2016 Romulus Gogonea 04/07/1942 Craiova Prison 30/01/2015 to 26/05/2016 1 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 27 day(s) 1.19 - 1.75 m² Overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air.   3,000   16610/16 17/05/2016 Marian Volovei 26/08/1970 Râmnicu-Vâlcea Police, Craiova and Colibaşi Prisons 28/06/2001     Pending   More than 17 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 20 day(s)   1.28 - 2.43 m² Overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or inadequate furniture. 5,000   18525/16 18/03/2016 Gábor Péter 03/12/1987 Codlea Prison 26/02/2013 to 19/01/2016 2 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 25 day(s) 1.1 - 2.73 m² Overcrowding (save for the period of 06/05 - 13/10/2015), bunk beds, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or inadequate furniture, poor quality of food.   3,000   [1] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.