CEDH · PRESS;FORTHCOMINGJUDGMENTS;ENG — 29 juin 2006

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s40F41F73 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS   386 29.6.2006   Press release issued by the Registrar   FORTHCOMING GRANDCHAMBER JUDGMENT RAMIREZ SANCHEZ v. FRANCE   4 July 2006   The European Court of Human Rights will be holding a public hearing in the Human Rights Building, Strasbourg, on Tuesday 4 July 2006 at 2.30 p.m. (local time) to deliver the Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Ramirez Sanchez v. France (application no. 59450/00).   The press release and the text of the judgment will be available after the hearing on the Court’s Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).     Ramirez Sanchez v. France   Ilich Ramirez Sanchez, better known as “Carlos the Jackal”, is a Venezuelan national aged 56 who is currently detained in Clairvaux Prison (France).   The applicant was placed under investigation in connection with a series of terrorist attacks carried out in France and sentenced to life imprisonment on 25 December 1997 for the murder of three police officers in 1975.   For eight years and two months – from his detention in Santé Prison on 15 August 1994 until his transfer to Saint-Maur Prison on 17 October 2002 – the applicant was held in solitary confinement. The reasons generally given to justify the decisions to prolong his detention in solitary confinement were his dangerousness, the need to maintain order and security in the prison and the risk of his absconding. On each occasion, the applicant underwent medical examinations to determine his fitness for solitary confinement.   This regime meant that the applicant was detained alone in a cell measuring 6.84 square metres, which, he said, was dilapidated and poorly insulated. He had no contact with other prisoners or prison warders and was authorised to leave his cell only for a two-hour daily walk. The applicant further alleged that his only recreation was provided by newspapers and a rented television, and that he received no visits other than from his lawyers and, once a month, a cleric.   The applicant complains that his prolonged solitary confinement from 15 August 1994 to 17   October 2002 violated Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman and degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights. The applicant also alleges that the authorities did not follow the correct procedure for prolonging his solitary confinement, in breach of Article   13 (right to an effective remedy).   The application was lodged with the European Court of Human Rights on 20 July 2000 and declared admissible on 19 February 2004.   In a judgment of 27 January 2005 (see press release 038 from 2005), the Court held by four votes to three that there had been no violation of Article 3 and unanimously that there had been a violation of Article 13 of the Convention.   The applicant requested that the case be referred to the Grand Chamber under Article 43 (referral to the Grand Chamber) and on 6 June 2005 the panel of the Grand Chamber accepted that request.     ***   Press Contacts   Emma Hellyer (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15) Stéphanie Klein (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Beverley Jacobs (telephone: 00 33 (0)3 90 21 54 21)   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg by the Council of Europe Member States in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights.