CEDH · CASELAW;DECISIONS;ADMISSIBILITYCOM;ENG — 24 novembre 2022

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s2EF17D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:2pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .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 } .s9D48DD53 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:justify; font-size:10pt } .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 } .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 }   FOURTH SECTION DECISION Application no. 3970/17 Claudiu-Marin BOTOREA against Romania and 11 other applications (see appended table) The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24   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 applicant, Having deliberated, decides as follows: FACTS AND PROCEDURE The list of applicants is set out in the appended table. The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian 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) The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows: “No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” The Government argued mainly that the applicants had lost their victim status because they had benefitted from the remedy offered by Law no.   169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences. They asked the Court to reject the present applications for being incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention. The applicants disagreed, claiming that the compensation awarded to them was insufficient. The Court notes that in the decision Dîrjan and Ştefan v. Romania ((dec.), nos.   14224/15 and 50977/15, 15 April 2020) it has examined similar applications as the ones in the present case and declared them inadmissible because the applicants had lost their victim status. The Court noted that Law no.   169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences, adopted following the pilot judgment in the case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania (nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017) and in force between October 2017 and December 2019, was an effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romanian prisons. More specifically, the above law set forth a compensatory remedy, available for periods of detention ranging from 2012 to 2019 and allowing the deduction of six days for 30 days spent in conditions of detention that fell short of standards compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see Dîrjan and Ştefan , cited above, § 28). That benefit had an impact on the term of the prison sentences, giving detainees an opportunity of earlier release on parole. Turning to the circumstances of the present cases, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility of those complaints. The above-mentioned remedy was available to the applicants in the present applications and, indeed, they benefitted from it. Thus, on different dates, the domestic authorities, applying the provisions laid down in the abovementioned decision Dîrjan and Ştefan , awarded compensation, through the reduction of days, to the applicants for the entire period of detention spent in inadequate conditions of which they complained (for further details see the appended table). Furthermore, the applicants were released from prison or were transferred to detention facilities they are not complaining about. The Court is therefore satisfied that the applicants have been afforded adequate redress and can no longer claim to be victims of a violation of their rights under Article 3 of the Convention, insofar as the conditions of their detention, described in the appended table, are concerned. It follows that the applications in this part are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected in accordance with Article   35   §§   3   (a) and 4 of the Convention. Remaining complaints In applications nos.   3970/17, 53119/17, 56224/17, 59026/17, 59758/17, 21295/18, 53642/19 and 63145/19, the applicants also raised other complaints under various articles of the Convention. The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table 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, 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. For these reasons, the Court, unanimously, Decides to join the applications; Declares the applications inadmissible. Done in English and notified in writing on 15 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 Domestic compensation awarded (in days) based on total period calculated by national authorities     3970/17 31/01/2017 Claudiu-Marin BOTOREA 1978   Cluj County Police Station and Gherla Prison 08/07/2014 to 05/06/2019 4 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 29 day(s) 318 days in compensation for a total period of 1,590 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 08/07/2014 to 05/06/2019, including all the periods spent in the detention facilities he complained of except for the periods spent in transit rooms     53119/17 17/07/2017 Daniel BARBU 1980 Cadar Andreea-Gabriela Galați Tulcea and Focșani Prisons 01/02/2016 to 08/07/2016 5 month(s) and 8 day(s)   Focșani Prison 21/08/2016 to 24/02/2017 6 month(s) and 4 day(s)   Focșani Prison 07/03/2017 to 18/03/2017 12 day(s) 198 days in compensation for a total period of 996 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 29/05/2014 to 19/10/2017, including all the periods spent in Focșani, Mărgineni and Tulcea Prisons     54473/17 20/07/2017 Cătălin Ionuț TĂNASE 1994 Cadar Andreea-Gabriela Galați Slobozia and Constanța - Poarta Albă Prisons 07/09/2015 to 27/04/2017 1 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 21 day(s) 132 days in compensation for a total period of 683 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 07/09/2015 to 19/10/2017, including all the periods spent in Slobozia and Constanța - Poarta Albă Prisons, except for the period 18/09/2017 - 02/10/2017 spent in transit rooms     56224/17 28/07/2017 Gheorghe FERĂSCU 1960 Cadar Andreea-Gabriela Galați Constanța - Poarta Albă and Tulcea Prisons 31/01/2017 to 19/03/2017 1 month(s) and 20 day(s) 180 days in compensation for a total period of 913 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 18/11/2016 to 05/06/2019, including all the periods spent in Constanța - Poarta Albă and Tulcea Prisons     58707/17 02/08/2017 Dimitrie Cristian SCARLAT 1993 Cadar Andreea-Gabriela Galați Constanța - Poarta Albă Prison 24/11/2014 to 26/11/2014 3 day(s)   Constanța - Poarta Albă Prison 28/11/2014 to 21/05/2017 2 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 24 day(s) 210 days in compensation for a total period of 1,059 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/11/2014 to 19/10/2017, including all the periods spent in Constanța - Poarta Albă Prison     59026/17 04/08/2017 Nicolae NECULA 1980 Cadar Andreea-Gabriela Galați Constanța - Poarta Albă Prison 16/02/2016 to 05/05/2017 1 year(s) and 2 month(s) and 20 day(s) 174 days in compensation for a total period of 871 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 02/02/2016 to 03/07/2018, including all the periods spent in Constanța - Poarta Albă Prison     59758/17 11/08/2017 Ciprian-Daniel POSTOVIC 1977 Cadar Andreea-Gabriela Galați Slobozia Prison 17/01/2017 to 18/03/2017 2 month(s) and 2 day(s) 120 days in compensation for a total period of 624 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 18/10/2016 to 25/06/2019, including all the periods spent in Slobozia Prison     6407/18 30/03/2018 Costel TULITU 1961   Craiova and Craiova - Pelendava Prisons 27/10/2016 to 04/06/2018 1 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 9 day(s) 108 days in compensation for a total period of 569 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 27/10/2016 to 04/06/2018 in Craiova and Craiova - Pelendava Prisons     20208/18 18/04/2018 Ion URSACIUC 1970 Trif Nicoleta Arad Botoșani and Timișoara Prisons 22/06/2016 to 24/10/2017 1 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 3 day(s) 96 days in compensation for a total period of 491 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 22/06/2016 to 24/10/2017 in Botoșani and Timișoara Prisons   21295/18 24/04/2018 Roxana HOGEA (CRĂCIUN) 1983 Finică Silviu Ciprian Bacău Bacău Prison 04/06/2014 to 12/09/2014 3 month(s) and 9 day(s)   Bacău Prison 17/09/2014 to 13/02/2015 4 month(s) and 28 day(s)   Bacău Prison 18/03/2015 to 31/10/2017 2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 14 day(s) 246 days in compensation for a total period of 1,230 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 04/06/2014 to 31/10/2017, including all the periods spent in Bacău Prison   53642/19 31/10/2019 Gheorghe ZUICĂ 1956   Bucharest - Rahova and Giurgiu Prisons 17/12/2016 to 27/02/2017 2 month(s) and 11 day(s)   Giurgiu and Bucharest - Rahova Prisons 03/03/2017 to 26/05/2017 2 month(s) and 24 day(s)   Bucharest - Rahova Prison 06/06/2017 to 11/01/2018 7 month(s) and 6 day(s)   Bucharest - Rahova and Bucharest - Jilava Prisons 18/01/2018 to 28/08/2018 7 month(s) and 11 day(s)   Bucharest - Jilava Prison 31/08/2018 to 12/02/2019 5 month(s) and 13 day(s)   Bucharest - Jilava and Găești Prisons 19/02/2019 to 13/11/2019 8 month(s) and 26 day(s) 210 days in compensation for a total period of 1,066 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 10/11/2016 to 13/11/2019, including all the periods spent in Bucharest - Rahova, Giurgiu, Bucharest - Jilava and Găești Prisons, except for days spent in infirmary and prison hospitals   63145/19 27/11/2019 Ion ȚÎNȚAȘ 1968   Baia Mare Prison 06/11/2018 to 19/06/2019 7 month(s) and 14 day(s) 480 days in compensation for a total period of 2,416 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 19/06/2019, including all the periods spent in Gherla, Satu Mare and Baia Mare Prisons, except for days spent in a prison hospital