FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 42216/14 Mihai SCARLAT against Romania and 6 other applications

( s ee appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 9 July 2020 as a Committee composed of:

Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström , President , Georges Ravarani , Jolien Schukking, judges ,

and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application s lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicant s is set out in the appended table.

The applicants ’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”) . In applications nos. 42216/14 and 28499/16 the applicants also raised other complaints under the same provision of the Convention.

THE LAW

Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:

“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”

The Government pleaded that the applicants had lost their victim status due to the fact that they had benefitted from the remedy offered by Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences. They asked the Court to reject the present applications for being incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention.

The applicants disagreed claiming that the compensation they had received had not been sufficient.

The Court notes that, in its recent decision Dîrjan and Ştefan v. Romania (( dec. ), nos. 14224/15 and 50977/15, 15 April 2020) the Court has examined similar applications as the ones in the present case and declared them inadmissible considering that the applicants had lost their victim status. The Court noted that Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences, adopted following the pilot judgment in the case of Rezmive ș and Others v. Romania ( no s . 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017) and in force between October 2017 and December 2019, had been an effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romanian prisons. More specifically, the above law had set forth a compensatory remedy, available for periods of detention ranging from 2012 to 2019 and allowing the deduction of six days for 30 days spent in conditions of detention that fell short of standards compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see Dîrjan and Ştefan , cited above, § 28). This benefit had impacted on the term of the prison sentences and had given detainees the opportunity of earlier release on parole.

Turning to the circumstances of the present cases, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on their admissibility. The above-mentioned remedy was available to the applicants in the present applications and, indeed, they benefitted from it. Thus, on different dates, the domestic authorities, applying the provisions described in the decision Dîrjan and Ştefan , awarded compensation, through the reduction of days, to the applicants for the entire period of detention spent in inadequate conditions of which they complained (for further details see the appended table). Furthermore, the applicants have been released from prison.

The Court is therefore satisfied that the applicants have been afforded adequate redress and can no longer claim to be victims of a violation of their rights under Article 3 of the Convention. It follows that the applications are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.

In applications nos. 42216/14 and 28499/16 the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention.

The Court has examined these application s and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matters complained of are within its competence, these complaints either do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or do not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.

It follows that this part of applications nos. 42216/14 and 28499/16 must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention .

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Declares the applications inadmissible.

Liv Tigerstedt Stéphanie Mourou-Vikström Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

( inadequate conditions of detention )

No.

Application no.

Date of introduction

Applicant ’ s name

Date of birth

Representative ’ s name and location

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

Domestic compensation awarded (in days) based on total period calculated domestically

42216/14

07/07/2014

Mihai SCARLAT

16/09/1977

Giurgiu and Jilava Prisons

23/07/2013 to 05/07/2015

1 year and 11 months and 13 days

372 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions between 24/07/2012-26/10/2017

41142/15

10/08/2015

Constantin HANGANU

23/05/1972

Miercurea Ciuc and Codlea Prisons, Dej Prison Hospital

19/01/2015 to 19/12/2017

2 years and 11 months

204 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions between 13/12/2014-19/12/2017

28371/16

27/06/2016

Maria Drăgoi

Brașov

18554/16

23/09/2016

Alin -Eugen BERBECE

19/03/1984

Iași Prison

20/08/2015 to 16/03/2017

1 year and 6 months and 25 days

222 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions between 24/03/2015-11/05/2018

20455/16

06/06/2016

Fernando IONIŢĂ

23/09/1991

Bucharest Police detention facility no. 9, Rahova , Jilava and Colibași Prisons

17/07/2014 to 10/01/2018

3 years and 5 months and 25 days

246 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions between 17/07/2014-10/01/2018

20730/16

28/04/2016

IonuÈ› Valentin BRÄ‚TOIU

14/09/1986

Colibași Prison

23/04/2014 to 24/08/2017

3 years and 4 months and 2 days

240 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions between 17/04/2014-13/12/2017

28499/16

14/06/2016

Adrian PSLARU

22/03/1983

Iași and Botoșani Prisons

06/01/2015 to 04/04/2018

3 years and 2 months and 30 days

244 days in compensation for part of the period of detention spent in inadequate conditions between 25/11/2014-04/04/2018