CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;FRA;FRE — 12 janvier 2018

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .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 } .s83BE5C30 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .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 } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .s72C8F48C { margin-top:12pt; margin-left:36.6pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:-15.05pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .sF7A86111 { margin-top:6pt; margin-left:21.25pt; margin-bottom:6pt; text-indent:7.1pt; font-size:10pt } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .sC36A6361 { font-family:Arial; color:#000000 }   Communiquée le 12 janvier 2018   QUATRIÈME SECTION Requête n o 70531/17 A.H. contre le Portugal introduite le 20 septembre 2017 EXPOSÉ DES FAITS Le requérant, M. A.H., est un ressortissant malgache né en 1994 et actuellement détenu à l’établissement pénitentiaire de Carregueira à Belas. Il est représenté devant la Cour par M e   R. Elói Ferreira, avocat à Lisbonne. A.     Les circonstances de l’espèce Les faits de la cause, tels qu’ils ont été exposés par le requérant, peuvent se résumer comme suit. Le 24 juillet 2015, le requérant fut arrêté en exécution d’un mandat d’arrêt émis par le parquet près le tribunal de Sintra dans le cadre d’une procédure pénale ouverte contre lui pour viol et abus sexuel de personne incapable de résister (procédure interne n o   5104/15.2P8LSB). Il fut placé le jour même en garde à vue ( detenção ) à l’établissement pénitentiaire de la police judiciaire à Lisbonne. Le jour suivant, il fut entendu par le juge d’instruction qui décida de le placer en détention provisoire ( detenção preventiva) . Le 19 septembre 2015, le requérant fut transféré à l’établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne («   EPL   »). Il fût placé dans l’aile A. de la prison dans différentes cellules d’environ 6 m 2 qu’il dit avoir toujours partagé avec un autre codétenu, à l’exception d’une période de cinq jours. À une date non précisée, le tribunal de Lisbonne prononça une peine de prison à son encontre. Le 24 mars 2017, le requérant fut transféré à la prison de Carregueira où il purge toujours sa peine. B.     Le droit international et européen pertinent 1.     Général Pour le droit international et européen pertinent, voir les paragraphes 46 à   53, 55, 56 et 59 à 65 de l’arrêt Muršić c. Croatie [GC], n o 7334/13, CEDH   2016. 2.     Les rapports du comité européen pour la prévention de la torture et des peines ou traitements inhumains ou dégradants (CPT) Des délégations du CPT ont visité l’établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne en 1999, 2012, 2013 et 2016. Le dernier rapport publié porte sur la visite de 2013 (ce rapport est uniquement disponible en anglais). Les parties pertinentes concernant l’établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne se lisaient ainsi   : “12.     Lisbon Central Prison, located in the city centre, has been in service for 127 years. The building was sold to private developers in 2007 as the authorities intended to build a new establishment for the Lisbon area. However, no such establishment has been built and the Portuguese authorities are now renting the prison, with an intention to buy it back. At the time of the visit, 1,310 male prisoners were being held – including 616 on remand and four minors – for an official capacity of 886; i.e. an occupancy rate of almost 150%. ... b.     Conditions of detention 20.     As regards material conditions, the delegation noted that a number of the inmates had new or clean bedclothes and mattresses. Further, following the CPT’s recommendation in the report on the 2012 visit, a maximum of two prisoners were now being held in the standard 9m² cells in the establishment’s main building. According to information gathered by the delegation, this last measure was only implemented a few days before the CPT’s visit. The Committee welcomes these improvements and trusts that they will be maintained. However, the mattresses in certain wings – in particular in the basement of C wing – were dirty, very thin and falling apart. Moreover, the material conditions in general had not improved since the 2012 visit. The establishment continued to be in an advanced state of dilapidation. In different wings, the delegation found cells with broken windows and a foul odour emanating from the toilets. Further, inmates stated that their cells were particularly cold during winter months due to the structural deficiencies of the building (broken windows, no heating system). 21.     In their response to the 2012 report, the Portuguese authorities indicated that reviews were regularly carried out in the establishment to identify deficiencies and rectify the most urgent ones, including changing light bulbs. However, many cells in the prison continued to be deprived of any artificial lighting, which plunged the cells into total darkness after sundown and left them gloomy on cloudy days. As an illustration, the delegation visited a cell where the prisoner used his television to illuminate his cell at night. In a number of other cells, inmates had manufactured their own makeshift lighting devices to replace the missing lamp socket. All cells should be provided with safe, functioning artificial lighting. Further, the delegation again noted that toilets in multi-occupancy cells were still not partitioned. The CPT considers that the benefits of greater privacy and improved hygiene offered by a partition outweigh any reduction in the space within the cell. [12] Material conditions remain especially poor in the basement areas of B, C, D and E Wings [13] where cells were damp with crumbling plaster. Inmates held in these cells indicated the presence of rats. In sum, the conditions have not improved in these areas and could be considered as amounting to inhuman and degrading treatment. These cells should not be used until they have been properly refurbished. 22.     As mentioned above, the authorities stated that they were considering the possibility of buying back the Lisbon Central Prison and had no intention of closing the establishment in the near future. Therefore, the CPT reiterates its recommendation that vigorous action be undertaken to renovate the different wings, starting with the basement units mentioned above. In this context, priority should be given to repairing broken windows, providing artificial lighting in every cell as well as fully partitioning the toilets in all the cells used by more than one person. The Committee would like to receive a detailed timetable for the upgrading of the different areas of the prison. 23.     As regards activities, the situation had in fact deteriorated since the 2012 visit. At the time of the 2013 visit, only 187 prisoners were involved in a work activity and 232 inmates were enrolled in educational courses (sometimes for only a few hours per week). Educational activities were reserved for sentenced prisoners and registration for the different courses was only possible at the beginning of the academic year (i.e. September). Consequently, remand prisoners and persons who were sentenced or arrived in the course of the year were prevented from accessing education courses. Therefore, almost 900 inmates spent their days with little to occupy them, other than loitering in their wings, playing board games or exercising. ... c.     Health-care services 25.     In the report on the 2012 visit, the CPT recommended that the presence of the health-care staff at Lisbon Central Prison be increased (i.e. to the equivalent of at least three full-time general practitioners, together with the recruitment of additional nurses and the provision of psychological counselling). In their response, the authorities indicated that, despite financial constraints, there had been an increase in the presence of general practitioners, nurses and psychologists. The presence of the pharmacist had also been increased to almost a full-time equivalent post (i.e. 35 hours per week). However, at the time of the visit, health-care staff resources in terms of general practitioners and nurses remained far from sufficient for a population of some 1,300 inmates. The only full-time general practitioner, who headed the health-care service, was absent and, in fact, had been on sick leave for a month. Apart from that, three part-time doctors were present for a total of 26 hours per week. Twelve nurses were employed for a total of 320 hours per week, i.e. the equivalent of some nine full-time posts. In the CPT’s view, the staffing level of nurses should be of 15 full-time posts for such establishment. The Committee reiterates its recommendation that steps be taken to increase the presence of general practitioners at Lisbon Central Prison to the equivalent of at least three full-time posts. Further, the presence of nurses should be increased, in the light of the above remark. The CPT is also concerned to note that the number of hours spent by a dentist had been reduced by 33% within one year (from 21 hours per week to 14 hours). Given the size of the inmate population, the Committee recommends that the presence of a dentist be increased to the equivalent of at least a half-time post. ... d.     Prison staff 30.     Staffing levels have further decreased since the CPT’s previous visit. At the time of the 2013 visit, there were only 199 prison officers for some 1,300 prisoners (i.e. 22 fewer officers than in 2012). Further, the Director no longer had any deputies to assist her; she appeared to be overburdened by administrative work and, as a consequence, she had a limited control over the situation in the establishment. ...” C.     Le droit et la pratique interne pertinents 1.     Le droit interne pertinent Les droits et les devoirs des détenus sont stipulés aux articles 6 à 8 du code sur l’exécution des peines et mesures privatives de liberté, adopté par la loi n o 115/2009 du 12 octobre 2009. 2.     La pratique interne pertinente Dans son rapport de visite à l’établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne effectuée le 19 janvier 2016 [1] , le Médiateur de la République ( Provedor de Justiça) indiquait que cet établissement était, au moment des faits, occupé par 1   320   détenus pour une capacité prévue pour 887 détenus. Il concluait son rapport en ces termes   : «   (...) il est urgent de faire l’une de ces deux choses. Soit construire en partant de zéro un autre établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne (...) soit entreprendre des travaux de fond en comble dans l’actuel établissement. La dignité humaine, la défense intransigeante des droits fondamentaux «   basiques   » ( comezinhos)- (...)- la compassion vis-à-vis de l’autre, le respect de l’autre ne peuvent pas- ne doivent pas- permettre que, malgré la situation de crise économique ou financière, les personnes puissent être, même si elles se trouvent de façon légitime privées de leur liberté, dans des situations objectivement aussi inhumaines.   » GRIEFS Invoquant l’article 3 de la Convention, le requérant se plaint d’avoir été soumis à des conditions matérielles de détention inhumaines et dégradantes à l’établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne entre le 19 septembre 2015 et le 24   mars 2017. Il dénonce en particulier le surpeuplement carcéral, les mauvaises conditions sanitaires et d’hygiènes, le manque de chauffage, la qualité de la literie et des repas et l’impossibilité pour lui d’être vu par un dentiste. Sur le terrain de l’article 13 de la Convention combiné avec l’article 3, le requérant se plaint aussi de l’inexistence au niveau interne d’un recours en matière de conditions de détention. QUESTIONS AUX PARTIES 1.     Compte tenu des allégations du requérant quant à ses conditions de détention à l’établissement pénitentiaire de Lisbonne («   EPL   »), celles-ci s’analysent-elles en une peine ou un traitement inhumain ou dégradant contraire à l’article 3 de la Convention (à cet égard, parmi beaucoup d’autres, Muršić c. Croatie [GC], n o 7334/13, §§ 136-141, CEDH 2016, Ananyev et autres c. Russie , nos 42525/07 et 60800/08, §§ 139-159, 10   janvier 2012 et Rezmiveș et autres c. Roumanie , n os 61467/12 et 3 autres, §§   78-79, 25 avril 2017) ?   Le Gouvernement est invité à fournir des informations précises quant aux conditions de détention à l’EPL (sur ce point voir Muršić , précité, §   128, CEDH 2016), en indiquant notamment :   a)   Le numéro de cellules et les dates d’occupation par le requérant de celles-ci ; b)   La taille des cellules occupées par le requérant ; c)   Le nombre de lits existants dans les cellules aux dates d’occupation par le requérant (indiquer la qualité de la literie) ; d)   Le nombre de codétenus ; e)   Les conditions sanitaires ; f)   L’accès à la lumière et à l’air naturels, la qualité du chauffage des cellules qu’il a occupées   ; g)   Les conditions d’accès à un médecin ou un dentiste.   2.     Le requérant disposait-il d’un recours préventif et compensatoire pour conditions de détention contraires à l’article 3 de la Convention, tel qu’exigé par l’article 13 de la Convention (voir Torreggiani et autres c. Italie , n os   43517/09 et 6 autres, §§ 54-55 et 96-97, 8 janvier 2013 et Varga et autres c.   Hongrie , n os 14097/12 et 5 autres, §§ 49-50, 10 mars 2015) ?   Le Gouvernement est invité à présenter la législation et la jurisprudence pertinente sur la question.   [1] .     O Provedor de Justiça, as prisões e o século XXI: diário de algumas visitas (I)/ Relatório ao Estabelecimento Prisional de Lisboa.