CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 4 juin 2013

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s3E839E41 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:30pt; text-align:center } .s58ABC179 { margin-top:30pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s401C450A { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:18pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s7EE1C8F0 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sD5DF731 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sC702907E { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s984A15CA { margin-top:6pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sEC177689 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:36pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s967D43C6 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:justify; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } THIRD SECTION Application no. 54966/09 Radu George OPREA against Romania lodged on 9 October 2009 STATEMENT OF FACTS The applicant, Mr Radu George Oprea, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1974. The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows. On 12 October 2009, the applicant was transferred from Arad Prison to Timişoara Prison, where he is currently serving a seventeen-year sentence for murder. 1.     The applicant’s material conditions of detention In essence, the applicant complains about overcrowding and lack of proper conditions of hygiene in Timişoara Prison. With respect to the question of overcrowding, the applicant maintains that while occupying cell no. 53 [E8.4], which was approximately 13   square metres, he shared the cell with 9 other inmates, thus leaving him with less than 1.5 square metres of personal space. The applicant further maintains that while occupying cell no. 37 [E5.2], which was approximately 26   square metres, he shared the cell with 15 other inmates, thus leaving him with less than 1.5 square metres of personal space. The applicant also alleges that, while occupying cell no. 41[E6.2], he benefited of approximately 2 square metres of personal space, but fails to add further details concerning the size of the room or the number of inmates. With respect to the question of proper conditions of hygiene, the applicant alleges that there were rats, parasites and bedbugs in the cells. The applicant further maintains that because of general overcrowding and poor hygiene conditions, inmates were more prone to catch viruses, infections and skin diseases, such as, among others, skin fungus. 2.     The applicant’s domestic complaints concerning the material conditions of detention On 21 October 2009, the applicant, relying on Articles 998-999 of the former Civil Code, lodged a complaint against Timişoara Prison, the Ministry of Justice and the National Administration of Penitentiaries, seeking damages for his inhuman conditions of detention. The applicant complained that, following his transfer to Timişoara Prison, he shared a small cell with 19 other inmates. On 21 April 2011, the Timiş District Court dismissed the applicant’s complaint on the ground that the conditions for liability imposed by the former Civil Code had not been met because the ratio of inmates per size of the room was in accordance with the minimal standards laid down in an Order of the Minister of Justice (Order nr. 433/C/2010). The first-instance judgement was upheld by the Timişoara Court of Appeal. The applicant lodged an appeal against the decision with the High Court of Cassation and Justice. The applicant’s appeal was dismissed as unfounded on 15   June 2012. COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about his conditions of detention in Timişoara Prison, particularly with respect to overcrowding and poor hygiene conditions.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES   Has the applicant been subject to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, due to the conditions of his detention in Timişoara Prison? The Government are invited to provide information and supporting documents on the material conditions of the applicant’s detention in Timişoara Prison, in particular concerning the size of the cells, the number of the detainees in the cells at the time the applicant was detained and the facilities available.