CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 3 avril 2020

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s25D5DE94 { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:7pt } Communicated on 3 April 2020 Published on 25 May 2020   FOURTH SECTION Application no. 64133/19 Clive Veron REYMOND against the Netherlands lodged on 16 December 2019 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE This application concerns the allegedly poor conditions of the applicant’s detention on remand in the Police Complex of Philipsburg in Sint Maarten from 25 July until 17 December 2019. The applicant complains that he had to remain in his cell for 23.5 hours a day. The cell was approximately 30   square meters; its official capacity of three detainees was frequently exceeded by one or two detainees. It had no natural light, insufficient ventilation and no air-conditioning. The cell had a shower and toilet which were not separated from the living area. The toilet could not be covered which contributed to the stench of sewerage in the cell. There was no running water in the cell and the toilet and shower only worked when a warden pulled a handle outside the cell. The light functioned in the same way. Detainees had to scream for the warden’s attention, and their screams often went unheard or were ignored. Relying on Article 3, the applicant holds that these detention conditions constitute inhuman and degrading treatment.   QUESTION TO THE PARTIES Did the material conditions of the applicant’s detention, in particular the personal space available in the cell, the time allowed outside the cell and the sanitary conditions, amount to inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention?