CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 30 mars 2016

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .sA8776625 { margin-top:18pt; margin-left:29.2pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-indent:-17.6pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sE872AC7E { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:28.35pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .sE5273FBD { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; text-align:center; font-size:10pt } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s75A32C27 { border-collapse:collapse } .s3695F815 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#dfdfdf } .s598389F9 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:12pt } .sEECE831 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#474747 } .sE8934522 { border:0.75pt solid #949494; padding:1.02pt 5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s8F670191 { font-family:Arial; font-size:12pt; list-style-position:inside } .s2EF62ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:12pt }   Communicated on 30 March 2016   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 20440/15 Á.R. against Hungary and 2 other applications (see list appended) STATEMENT OF FACTS The first applicant, Mr Á.R., was born in 1978 and is currently serving a prison sentence in Márianosztra. The second applicant, Mr A.M., was born in 1978 and lives in Sopron. The third applicant, Mr A.K., was born in 1968 and lives in Budapest. The applicants are represented before the Court by Mr   T. Fazekas, a lawyer practising in Budapest. A.     The circumstances of the case The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. 1.     The first applicant The first applicant suffers from epilepsy and a personality disorder. According to his own submissions, he grew and consumed cannabis partly because it alleviated the symptoms of his medical condition. He was ultimately convicted for possession of drugs on the basis of Article 178 of the Criminal Code and sentenced to five years’ imprisonment. He started serving his sentence in the Strict and Medium Regime Prison of Szeged. During his stay in that facility, he submits that he and another four inmates were held in a medical cell measuring 16 sq.m. He is currently serving his sentence in the Strict and Medium Regime Prison of Márianosztra, where he and two other inmates are sharing a cell of 8 sq.m. In both of his cells the toilet was separated from the rest of the cell only by a curtain and he has been allowed to take a shower only once a week for five minutes. In Márianosztra he also contracted influenza and athlete’s foot. 2.     The second applicant The second applicant suffers from diffuse cutaneous systemic sclerosis, which is an autoimmune disease characterised by thickening of the skin caused by accumulation of collagen, and by injuries to the smallest arteries. In its most serious form, the illness risks progressing to the visceral organs, including the kidneys, heart, lungs and gastrointestinal tract. In the second applicant’s case, the disease has led to troubled respiration, severe digestive condition and a weight loss of 15 kg. 3.     The third applicant The third applicant suffers from multiple sclerosis, diagnosed in 1998. This disease, which affects the patient’s central nervous system, has continuously caused deterioration of his health. He is now wheelchair-bound and can no longer lift his legs. His eyesight is worsening; he is in serious pain and has frequent urination stimuli. B.     Relevant domestic law and practice Relevant parts of the 2012 Criminal Code read as follows: Article 178 “(1) Any person who produces, manufactures, acquires, possesses, imports or exports, or transports narcotic drugs in transit through the territory of Hungary is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment between one to five years. ... (6) Any person who consumes narcotic drugs, or acquires or possesses a small quantity of narcotic drugs for own consumption is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment not exceeding two years, insofar as the act did not result in a more serious criminal offence.” Article 180 “(1) Any person who produces, manufactures, acquires or possesses a small quantity of narcotic drugs for own consumption shall not be prosecuted if the perpetrator has admitted to have committed the criminal offense and if able to produce a document before being sentenced in the first instance to verify that he has been treated for drug addiction for at least six consecutive months or that he has participated in a drug rehabilitation program or a preventive-consulting service relating to dependency.” COMPLAINTS 1.     The applicants complain under Article 8 of the Convention about the fact that domestic law does not allow for purely medical use of cannabis and/or cannabinoids. They all suffer from conditions which could allegedly be treated or alleviated by use of such substances, but under Hungarian law any possession and use of cannabis is illegal. 2.     The first applicant also complains under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his imprisonment.       QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Has there been a violation of the applicants’ right to respect for their private lives, within the meaning of Article 8 § 1 of the Convention? In particular, have the domestic authorities ever considered allowing medical use of cannabis and/or cannabinoids and, if so, what were the reasons for their decision? Was there a legal avenue for the applicants to exceptionally request treatment with cannabis-related substances and, if so, have the applicants ever used it? What is the margin of appreciation to be afforded to the respondent State in this case?   2.     Did the material conditions of the first applicant’s detention, in particular the personal space available in the cell and the sanitary conditions, amount to inhuman or degrading treatment in breach of Article 3 of the Convention?       Appendix   No Application No Lodged on Applicant Date of birth Place of residence Represented by   20440/15 14/04/2015 Á. R. 1978 Forráskút   Tamás FAZEKAS   21320/15 15/04/2015 A.M. 1978 Sopron   Tamás FAZEKAS   35837/15 16/07/2015 A.K. 1968 Budapest   Tamás FAZEKAS