CEDH · PRESS;GENERAL;ENG — 8 novembre 2002

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .s94935B0F { width:389.85pt; display:inline-block } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sF7493C01 { width:340.24pt; display:inline-block } .s4DDA3AA3 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; font-style:italic } .s8C1B0898 { width:140.15pt; display:inline-block } .s7ED160F0 { text-decoration:none } .s33165EBA { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } .sADADF4A7 { font-family:Arial; text-decoration:underline } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s3964C3A3 { width:1.36pt; display:inline-block } .s901C2590 { width:56.7pt; display:inline-block } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sF6A12959 { width:33%; height:1px; text-align:left } .s2EB42ED2 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:10pt } .s653E6C45 { font-family:Arial; font-size:6.67pt; vertical-align:super; color:#0069d6 } EUROPEAN COURT OF HUMAN RIGHTS     561   8.11.2002   Press release issued by the Registrar   CHAMBER JUDGMENTS CONCERNING Italy and Croatia   The European Court of Human Rights has today notified in writing the following two Chamber judgments, both of which are final:   Section 1       Friendly settlement (1)     Sulejmanovic & others and Sejdovic & Sulejmanovic v. Italy (application nos. 57574/00 & 57575/00) Paso, Hadzira and Nenad Sulejmanovic and Halida Sultanovic, Fatima Sejdovic and Izet Sulejmanovic were born in 1949, 1951, 1980, 1978, 1975 and 1973 respectively. They are of gypsy origin, but their nationality is unknown. The first two applicants are a married couple. They arrived in Italy, most probably in 1991, allegedly fleeing the war in Yugoslavia with their eight children, including their son, Nenad, the third applicant. They also lodged their application on behalf of their minor children. Halida Sultanovic is the wife of Nenad Sulejmanovic.   In 1995, when the applicants were living in the Casilino 700 travellers’ camp, Rome City Council organised a census of the traveller population, in the course of which the applicants’ names and photographs were entered in records. According to an ordinance of Rome City Council dated 23 January 1996, the census revealed that 5,467 travellers were living at 50   different places (organised camps or squatters’ settlements) within the territory of the municipality. At the organised camp of Casilino 700 there were 927 travellers. By the ordinance, the City Council prohibited the establishment of new squatters’ settlements and required travellers seeking admission to, or authorisation to remain in, the organised camps to produce a valid residence permit.   On 3 March 2000 the applicants were deported to Bosnia pursuant to deportation orders. They allege that at about 2 a.m. they were woken up by some 400 police officers and forced to leave their caravans at gunpoint. Once their identities had been established, they were taken to Fiumicino Airport, placed on a specially chartered aircraft and flown to Sarajevo. Altogether fifty-six gypsies from the Casilino 700 and Tor de’ Cenci camps were deported.   One of the minor children deported, Alissa, is a Down’s syndrome child, and had allegedly undergone heart surgery in Rome shortly before being deported.   The applicants made several complaints about their expulsion, relying on Article 8 (right to respect for private and family life), Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), Article 4 of Protocol No. 4 (prohibition of collective expulsion of aliens), Article   14 (prohibition of discrimination), Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) and Article 1 of Protocol No. 7 (procedural safeguards relating to expulsion of aliens) of the European Convention on Human Rights. They also complained about the period prior to their expulsion under Articles 3 and 14.   The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which the Italian Government has undertaken to revoke the deportation orders, to permit the applicants to enter Italy with their families and to issue them with leave to remain on humanitarian grounds. The Government has further undertaken to arrange for a temporary site to be provided pending a permanent solution, for children of school age to be allowed to attend school and for Alissa to receive the medical attention she needs. The applicants and their families, 16 people in all, are each to receive 7,746.90 euros (EUR), with the exception of Alissa, who is to receive EUR 45,090.10. Lastly, the Government will pay the applicants’ lawyers EUR 2,656.31 in respect of the proceedings before the Court. (The judgment is available only in French.)   (2)     Benzan v. Croatia (no. 62912/00)   Friendly settlement Darko Benzan, a Croatian national, was born in 1951 and is currently in Lepoglava State Prison (the “LSP”).   In 1994 the applicant was found guilty of murder. During the process he was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder and sentenced to 10 years’ imprisonment. Since 3 March 2000 he has been in the LSP where he was placed in B wing [1] . From May 2001 until June 2002 he was placed in a cell measuring 3,50 meters by 1,60 m. with no sanitary facilities and only a dim light on the ceiling. Most of the time there was another inmate sharing the cell with him. The cell smelled strongly of moisture and the cement walls were damp to the touch.       The applicant claims the mattresses were dirty and bloodstained and that the food served to inmates was insufficient and of low quality. Medical assistance was provided only once a week, on an assigned day, regardless of his health and he had no access to social services. There was no entertainment or other activities in the prison. Cases of ill-treatment by the guards were allegedly not uncommon.   According to the Government, food served to the inmates met recommended norms for calorie intake and medical assistance was provided according to the needs of each inmate. Inmates had an opportunity to work if they wished; there were wood and metal processing plants as well as some service-providing jobs. They were allowed to watch television, use a library, exercise or choose among several other activities such as art work, barrel-making, literature or music classes. On Sundays and public holidays films were screened and   sometimes concerts and plays were organised. The applicant was involved in therapeutic sessions for inmates with post-traumatic stress disorder and in outdoor exercise.     In June 2002 he was moved to another cell in a renovated wing.   The applicant complained, under Article 3 (prohibition of degrading treatment) about the conditions in Lepoglava State Prison.   The case has been struck out following a friendly settlement in which the Croatian Government has undertaken to renovate B Wing of Lepoglava State Prison before the end of September 2003. The applicant is also to be paid 12,000 euros for any non-pecuniary and pecuniary damage, costs and expenses. (The judgment is available only in English.)   ***   These summaries by the Registry do not bind the Court. The full texts of the Court’s judgments are accessible on its Internet site ( http://www.echr.coe.int ).   Registry of the European Court of Human Rights F – 67075 Strasbourg Cedex Contacts:   Roderick Liddell (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 24 92)   Emma Hellyer (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 90 21 42 15)   Stéphanie Klein (telephone: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 21 54) Fax: +00 33 (0)3 88 41 27 91   The European Court of Human Rights was set up in Strasbourg in 1959 to deal with alleged violations of the 1950 European Convention on Human Rights. On 1 November 1998 a full-time Court was established, replacing the original two-tier system of a part-time Commission and Court. [1]     On 1 July 2002 a delegation from the Court conducted a fact-finding mission to Lepoglava State Prison.