CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 10 novembre 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s34DFC730 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .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 } .s3AAE10DF { margin-top:14pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s3CA22BA { font-family:Arial; text-transform:uppercase } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6C5BED22 { margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s5E8F5A28 { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:25.5pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sAE6FB95D { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:32.01pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; padding-left:1.99pt; font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s2D9C6089 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s84651E4E { margin-top:14pt; margin-left:14.2pt; margin-bottom:3pt; text-align:justify } .s69DCC830 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s4598CDF { width:70.9pt; display:inline-block } .sC646A315 { width:14.54pt; display:inline-block } .s376CDD9C { width:117.08pt; display:inline-block } .s9852CA4C { width:7.54pt; display:inline-block } .s9E436411 { width:138.09pt; display:inline-block } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .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 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .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 } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .s1DE04BC { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } .sADF8F600 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:8pt } FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 53925/19 Cláudio Jorge SANTOS SOUSA against Portugal and 6 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 10   November 2022 as a Committee composed of:   Armen Harutyunyan , President ,   Anja Seibert-Fohr,   Ana Maria Guerra Martins , judges , and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar , Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended 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: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and the lack of an effective remedy in this respect were communicated to the Portuguese Government (“the Government”). THE LAW Joinder of the applications Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision. Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention) In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the complaints about the conditions of detention are inadmissible. Conditions of detention concerning the last period of detention The applicants were detained in different prison facilities. During their last, most recent and/or current period of detention, the applicants were detained at Carregueira Prison (applications nos. 53925/19, 55842/19, 60808/19, 61332/19, 62142/19 and 62146/19) and Vale de Judeus Prison (application no. 61323/19). Having regard to all of the available material and the parties’ arguments, the Court finds that it cannot establish that the applicants suffered in these prison facilities from severe overcrowding of the kind that could entail, on its own, a violation of Article 3 (see Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, 20   October 2016) nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicants complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhuman or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (see Bokor v. Portugal , no.   5227/18, § 34, 10 December 2020). In view of the above, the Court finds that the complaints related to these periods of the applicants’ detention (for further details see the appended table) are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 §§   3 and 4 of the Convention. Conditions of detention before their last prison transfer Concerning applications nos. 53925/19, 55842/19, 60808/19, 61332/19, 62142/19 and 62146/19, in light of the conclusion above, the Court finds that the applicants’ transfer to the last prison facility interrupted the «continuing situation» of their conditions of detention. Therefore, the applicants’ complaints concerning the conditions of detention regarding the period prior to his last prison transfer are belated (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos.   42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 75-78, 10 January 2012); and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention. Remaining complaints Invoking Article 8 of the Convention, the applicants complained that five-minute telephone calls per day were insufficient to maintain contact with their family and friends. The Court notes that this limitation is established in section 132 of the prison regulation. Furthermore, the Committee on the Prevention Against Torture (CPT) has considered five minutes per day of telephone calls to be satisfactory (see Bădulescu v. Portugal , no.   33729/18, §§   36-37, 20 October 2020). Given the other means of communication available to the applicants as detainees to maintain contact with their family and friends, it follows that this complaint is manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. Under Article 10 of the Convention, the applicants complained of the lack of access to the Internet, namely, to access government sites and relevant legal information. The Court’s case-law has established that Article 10 cannot be interpreted as imposing a general obligation to provide access to the Internet, or to specific Internet sites, for prisoners (see Kalda v.   Estonia , no.   17429/10, § 45, 19 January 2016). It is also noted that the applicant did not submit any request in this regard to the Director of the prison. It follows that this complaint is inadmissible and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35 §§   3 and 4 of the Convention. Under Article 13 of the Convention, the applicants also complained of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of their conditions of detention. The Court notes that, according to its established case-law, Article 13 of the Convention applies only where an individual has an “arguable claim” to be a victim of a violation of a Convention right (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom , 27 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131, and Narcisio v. Netherlands (dec.), no. 47810/99, 27 January 2005). Having regard to the findings above as to the applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention about their conditions of detention, the Court concludes that they are not “arguable” for the purposes of Article 13. It follows that this complaint must also be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 and 4 of the Convention. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 1 December 2022.     Viktoriya Maradudina   Armen Harutyunyan   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 Year of birth Representative’s name and location Facility Start and end date Duration Sq. m per inmate Specific grievances     53925/19 04/10/2019 Cláudio Jorge SANTOS SOUSA 1976 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Setúbal Prison 18/02/2015 to 05/03/2015 16 days         Lisbon Prison 05/03/2015 to 11/03/2015 7 days                       Lisbon Prison 11/03/2015 to 24/02/2017 1 year and 11 months and 14 days     Carregueira Prison 24/02/2017 to 01/03/2017 6 days         Carregueira Prison 01/03/2017 to 16/10/2017 8 months and 16 days       Carregueira Prison 16/10/2017 to 18/08/2021 3 years and 9 months and 3 days 2 inmates 7.5 m² 1 toilet           3 inmates 3.7 m² 1 toilet                         1 inmate 7.14 m² 1 toilet             1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet             5 inmates 5.64 m² 1 toilet             1 inmate 9.90 m² 1 toilet No activities outside the cell               lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of toiletries, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, bad odours, lack of requisite medical assistance, noise, overcrowding, lack of privacy for toilet                     idem                 poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient quantity of food                 idem                 idem     55842/19 21/10/2019 Fernando AUGUSTO CARDOSO 1959 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Setúbal Prison 05/12/2015 to 24/05/2017 1 year and 5 months and 20 days       Carregueira Prison 24/05/2017 to 26/05/2017 3 days       Carregueira Prison 26/05/2017 to 03/09/2017 3 months and 9 days     Carregueira Prison 03/09/2017 to 22/11/2018 1 year and 2 months and 20 days     Carregueira Prison 22/11/2018 to 05/12/2018 14 days     Carregueira Prison 05/12/2018 to 15/02/2019 2 months and 11 days     Carregueira Prison 15/02/2019 pending More than 3 years and 7 months and 2 days 3 inmates 2 m² 1 toilet             1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet           5 inmates 6.14 m² 1 toilet           1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet             5 inmates 6.76 m² 1 toilet         1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet           5 inmates 6.14 m² 1 toilet lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, overcrowding, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food, lack of toiletries, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of requisite medical assistance             poor quality of food, lack of or insufficient quantity of food               idem               idem                 idem             idem               idem     60808/19 12/11/2019 Domingos LAFAIETE COSTA QUEIRÓS 1962 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Setúbal Prison 06/01/2016 to 28/10/2016 9 months and 23 days       Carregueira Prison 28/10/2016 to 02/11/2016 6 day(s     Carregueira Prison 02/11/2016 pending More than 5 years and 10 months and 15 days 4 inmates 1.50 m² 1 toilet           23 inmates 1 m² 1 toilet         5 inmates 6.14 m² 1 toilet overcrowding, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, limited access to the telephone and no access to the internet       poor quality of food             idem     61323/19 18/11/2019 Francisco José CRUZ LEITÃO 1968 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Vale de Judeus Prison 19/06/2012 pending More than 10 years and 2 months and 29 days 1 inmate 6.98 m² 1 toilet poor quality of bedding and bed linen, bad odours, poor quality of food     61332/19 18/11/2019 Ramesh Manuel MEGGI CALA 1970 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Vale de Judeus Prison 01/01/2011 to 25/02/2011 1 month and 25 days     Carregueira Prison 25/02/2011 to 11/03/2011 15 days       Carregueira Prison 11/03/2011 pending More than 11 years and 6 months and 6 days 5 inmates 4 m² 1 toilet           1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet           5 inmates 6.14 m² 1 toilet overcrowding, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, passive smoking, lack of or insufficient electric light,             poor quality of food               idem     62142/19 25/11/2019 Carlos Artur MONTEIRO PITEIRA AZEDA 1965 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Setúbal Prison 19/10/2016 to 09/03/2018 1 year and 4 months and 19 days   Carregueira Prison 09/03/2018 to 14/03/2018 6 days     Carregueira Prison 14/03/2018 pending More than 4 years and 6 months and 3 days 8 inmates 2 m² 1 toilet         1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet         5 inmates 6.14 m² 1 toilet overcrowding, passive smoking, inadequate temperature, poor quality of food, lack of privacy for toilet, mouldy or dirty cell           poor quality of food             idem     62146/19 25/11/2019 David PEREIRA MARTINS 1980 Carreto Vítor Torres Vedras Setúbal Prison 27/06/2015 to 21/12/2017 2 years and 5 months and 25 days     Carregueira Prison 21/12/2017 to 08/01/2018 19 days     Carregueira Prison 08/01/2018 to 21/03/2018 2 months and 14 days       Carregueira Prison 21/03/2018 pending More than 4 years and 5 months and 27 days 5 inmates 2 m² 1 toilet             1 inmate 23 m² 1 toilet         5 inmates 6.76 m² 1 toilet             5 inmates 6.14 m² 1 toilet overcrowding, passive smoking, inadequate temperature, lack of privacy for toilet, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of requisite medical assistance, poor quality of food, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, limited access to the telephone and no access to the internet         poor quality of food             idem                 idem