CEDH · CASELAW;JUDGMENTS;COMMITTEE;ENG — 6 juin 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 } .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 } .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 } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s8BB62139 { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border-collapse:collapse } .s7E0EE884 { height:86.25pt } .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 } .s543F2762 { height:92.9pt } .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 } .s87F54B8E { height:5.6pt } .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 DUMITRESCU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA (Application no. 23365/15 and 9 other applications - see appended list )                 JUDGMENT     STRASBOURG   6 June 2019     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:   Georges Ravarani, President,   Marko Bošnjak,   Péter Paczolay, judges, and Liv Tigerstedt Acting Deputy Section Registrar, Having deliberated in private on 16 May 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. In applications nos.   58173/15 and 2387/16, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention. 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 principally 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.     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). 8.     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. 9.     Having examined all the material submitted to it, as well as the Government’s objection concerning the continuous situation 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. 10.     These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article   3 of the Convention. III.     REMAINING COMPLAINTS 11.     In applications nos.   58173/15 and 2387/16, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention. 12.     The Court has examined these complaints 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, they 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 these parts of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §   4 of the Convention. IV.     APPLICATION OF ARTICLE   41 OF THE CONVENTION 13.     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.” 14.     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. 15.     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 applications nos.   58173/15 and 2387/16 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 6 June 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   Representative’s 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]     23365/15 15/06/2015 Virgil Dumitrescu 06/05/1979 Irina Maria Peter Bucharest Bucharest 10th Police Arrest 14/11/2012 to 18/12/2012 1 month and 5 days   Rahova Prison 18/12/2012 to 24/12/2013 1 year and 7 days           Giurgiu Prison 24/12/2013 to 21/07/2014 6 months and 28 days           Jilava Prison 21/07/2014 to 21/01/2016 1 year, 6 months and 1 day 3.2 m²         2 m²                 0.7 m²                 1 - 2 m² lack of privacy for toilet, lack of fresh air, bunk beds, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities   overcrowding, bunk beds, lack of fresh air, no place to serve meal, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, inadequate temperature, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, infestation of cell with insects/rodents   overcrowding (save for the period between 21/02- 30/05/2014), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, bunk beds, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate furniture   overcrowding, bunk beds, lack of fresh air, poor quality of food, no place to serve meal, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, no or restricted access to potable water 3,000     51328/15 08/10/2015 Vasile Negrea 07/11/1984     Brașov Police Arrest 23/04/2015 to 07/07/2015 2 months and 15 days   lack of fresh air, lack of an adequate place to serve meals, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack of privacy for toilet, passive smoking 1,000     58173/15 05/01/2016 Florin-Bogdan-Robert Anghel 08/02/1991     Rahova Prison 30/03/2015 to 13/06/2016 1 year, 2 months and 15   days 1.9 - 2.7 m² overcrowding (save for the period 17/09 - 02/10/2015) 3,000     2387/16 28/01/2016 Nicu Greere 01/03/1985     Olt Police Arrest 30/03/2015 to 29/04/2015 1 month     Craiova Prison 29/04/2015 to 07/07/2016 1 year, 2 months and 9 days 4.1 m²           1.3 - 1.6 m² lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or inadequate furniture       overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities 3,000     9201/16 04/03/2016 Ioan Dălălău 01/05/1970 Irina Maria Peter Bucharest Mureş Police Arrest, Târgu Mureş, Jilava, Arad, Aiud, Deva, Bistriţa, Gherla Prisons and Jilava, Rahova, Colibaşi and Dej Prison Hospitals 10/04/2001 to 25/01/2017 15 years, 9 months and 16 days 1.4-2.7 m² overcrowding (save for the periods between 29/08-05/09/2011, 22/06/2012 - 10/01/2013, 24/06- 10/07/2014, 09/10- 28/10/2014 and 27/01- 09/02/2015), poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of potable water (Jilava Prison), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, inadequate temperature 5,000     37544/16 15/07/2016 Petre Argeșanu 25/10/1972     Colibași Prison 28/10/2014 to 14/06/2017 2 years, 7 months and 18 days 2.2 m² overcrowding (save for the periods between 25/11/2016 - 21/04/2017 and 27/04- 25/05/2017), lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, bunk beds 3,000     39582/16 01/08/2016 Lucian-Mihai Covaci 03/08/1982     Aiud Prison 22/08/2014 to 28/03/2017 2 years, 7 months and 7 days 2.4 - 2.6 m² overcrowding (save for the periods between 16-26/04/2015, 23/06- 15/09/2015 and 08/12/2015 - 29/02/2016), lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate furniture, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of toiletries, infestation of cell with insects/rodents 3,000     44255/16 13/09/2016 Georgică Apetri 02/08/1975     Colibași Prison 09/03/2015 to 04/05/2017 2 years, 1 month and 26   days 2.2 - 2.5 m² overcrowding (save for the period between 10-14/05/2016), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, bunk beds, inadequate temperature 3,000     44296/16 08/02/2017 Ancu Ion 22/01/1974     Bucharest Central Arrest, Rahova, Giurgiu and Jilava Prisons 19/11/2013 to 15/11/2016 2 years, 11 months and 28   days 1.6 - 2.8 m² overcrowding (save for the periods between 07/04- 16/06/2015, 22/07- 05/08/2015 and 19/08- 05/10/2015), lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities   3,000   59877/16 07/10/2016 Marian Pătrașcu 03/04/1984 Ionela Mărgărit Bucharest Galați Police Arrest 19/07/2013 to 16/09/2013 1 month and 29 days     Galați and Brăila Prisons 16/09/2013 pending More than 5 years, 6   months and 19 days 2.3 m²           1.3 - 2.5 m² overcrowding           overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, poor quality of food, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, no or restricted access to potable water (Galați Prison) 5,000   [1] .     Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.