Lexploria

FOURTH SECTION

CASE OF VITAN AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

(Application no. 31956/16 and 9 others –

see appended list)

JUDGMENT

STRASBOURG

27 October 2022

This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Vitan and Others v. Romania,

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

Armen Harutyunyan , President,

Jolien Schukking ,

Ana Maria Guerra Martins , judges, and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar ,

Having deliberated in private on 6 October 2022,

Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:

PROCEDURE

1. The case originated in applications against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.

2. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.

THE FACTS

3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.

4. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention.

THE LAW

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

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

Article 3

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

7. In applications nos. 31956/16, 32390/16, 44729/16, 51383/16, 67896/16, 21069/19 and 63585/19, the Government raised a preliminary objection concerning loss of victim status by the applicants for the periods of detention specified in the appended table because they were afforded adequate redress based on Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences for those specific periods of detention.

8. The Court notes that the domestic remedy introduced in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romania and applicable until December 2019 was held to be an effective one in the case of Dîrjan and Ştefan v. Romania ((dec.), nos. 14224/15 and 50977/15, §§ 23-33, 15 April 2020). This remedy was available to the applicants in the present applications, and they were, indeed, afforded adequate redress for certain periods of detention (for details see the appended table).

9. Therefore, the Court accepts the Government’s objection and finds that these parts of applications nos. 31956/16, 32390/16, 44729/16, 51383/16, 67896/16, 21069/19 and 63585/19 are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be declared inadmissible in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.

10. Turning to the remaining periods of the applicants’ detention as specified in the appended table, the Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case ‑ law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, MurÅ¡ić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96 ‑ 101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are “degrading” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see MurÅ¡ić , cited above, §§ 122 ‑ 41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149 ‑ 59, 10 January 2012).

11. In the leading case of RezmiveÈ™ and Others v. Romania (nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017), the Court already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.

12. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, (including its findings in the case of Polgar v. Romania , no. 39412/19, §§ 94-97, 20 July 2021), the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention, as described in the appended table, were inadequate.

13. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.

14. In applications nos. 31956/16, 44729/16, 67896/16 and 63585/19, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention.

15. The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table 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 the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

16. Article 41 of the Convention provides:

“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”

17. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case ‑ law (see, in particular, RezmiveÈ™ and Others, cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.

18. The Court further considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.

FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,

(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;

(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

Done in English, and notified in writing on 27 October 2022, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.

Viktoriya Maradudina Armen Harutyunyan 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

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Facility

Start and end date

Duration

Sq. m per inmate

Specific grievances

Domestic compensation awarded (in days) based on total period calculated by national authorities

Amount awarded for pecuniary and non ‑ pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant (in euros) [1]

31956/16

11/08/2016

Wilhelm VITAN

1969Irina Maria Peter

Bucharest

Gherla Prison

28/10/2015 to

19/11/2015

23 day(s)

Gherla Prison

08/12/2015 to

14/12/2015

7 day(s)

Gherla Prison

23/12/2015 to

04/02/2016

1 month(s) and 13 day(s)

Gherla Prison

09/02/2016 to

15/02/2016

7 day(s)

-

inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents

312 days in compensation for a total period of 1,579 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 23/01/2018, including all the periods spent in the detention facilities he complained of except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5

1,000

32390/16

13/07/2016

Sandu NEAGU

1978Brăila, Iași,

Bucharest - Rahova, Constanța - Poarta Albă, Galați and Giurgiu Prisons; Bucharest - Jilava, Târgu Ocna and Constanța - Poarta Albă Prison Hospitals

29/01/2003 to

23/07/2012

9 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 25 day(s)

Brăila Prison

23/12/2019

pending

More than 2 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 21 day(s)

1.29 - 2.90 m²

overcrowding (save for the periods

25/10/2005 - 15/02/2006,

01/06/2006 - 25/09/2007, 02/06/2009 - 09/06/2009 and 06/10/2009 - 09/10/2009), lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet

540 days in compensation for a total period of 2,700 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 22/12/2019

5,000

44729/16

20/07/2016

Ruben-Ovidiu POPA

(former FALIBAC)

1960Bucharest - Rahova Prison Hospital

27/10/2015 to

30/10/2015

4 day(s)

Miercurea Ciuc and Craiova Prisons

22/02/2016 to

23/03/2016

1 month(s) and 2 day(s)

Mioveni Prison Hospital, Arad and Craiova Prisons

11/04/2016 to

15/03/2018

1 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 5 day(s)

Mioveni and

Bucharest - Jilava Prisons, Mioveni and Dej Prison Hospitals

7 periods between 17/05/2018 and 01/02/2022 in the total amount of

5 month(s) and 10 day(s)

2.64 m²

overcrowding (save for the period

26/01/2022 - 01/02/2022), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light

144 days in compensation for a total period of 734 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 23/07/2015 to 22/12/2019, including all the periods spent in the detention facilities he complained of except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5

3,000

51383/16

30/01/2017

Florin-Cristinel IVĂȘCANU

1994Mehedinți County Police Station

23/01/2016 to

18/02/2016

27 day(s)

Craiova Prison

04/04/2016 to

07/04/2016

4 day(s)

Craiova Prison

05/01/2017 to

10/01/2017

6 day(s)

Craiova Prison

31/01/2017 to

08/02/2017

9 day(s)

1.53 - 2 m²

overcrowding, lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to warm water

198 days in compensation for a total period of 1,000 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 18/02/2016 to 04/12/2018 spent in Drobeta ‑ Turnu Severin and Craiova Prisons, except for the periods mentioned in column no. 5

1,000

58177/16

08/09/2016

Marius-Bogdan NEJLOVEANU

1987Bucharest - Jilava and Târgu Jiu Prisons

23/12/2019 to

06/08/2021

1 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 15 day(s)

Târgu Jiu Prison

10/08/2021 to

26/01/2022

5 month(s) and 17 day(s)

1.5 - 2 m²

overcrowding (save for the periods 23/12/2019 - 03/09/2020 and 04/02/2021 - 18/02/2021), lack of privacy for toilet, lack of fresh air, lack or inadequate furniture, infestation of cell with insects/rodents

3,000

67896/16

14/11/2016

Florin-Alexandru FILIP

1985Petru-Sorin Crudiu

Drobeta-Turnu Severin

TimiÈ™ County Police Station; Arad and Bucharest - Rahova Prisons

15/03/2010 to

17/10/2018

8 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 3 day(s)

Timișoara Prison

23/12/2019 to

09/10/2020

9 month(s) and 17 day(s)

Timișoara Prison

22/10/2020

pending

More than 1 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 22 day(s)

2 - 2.79 m²

overcrowding (save for the periods 25/03/2010 - 10/01/2011, 17/01/2011 - 20/06/2011, 22/11/2011 - 17/01/2013), poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to shower, lack of or insufficient natural light

78 days in compensation for a total period of 416 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 17/10/2018 to 22/12/2019 in Timișoara and

Bucharest - Jilava Prisons, except for short periods spent in transit rooms

5,000

75814/16

29/12/2016

Harry ÖTVÖS

1978Codlea Prison

23/12/2019 to

16/01/2020

25 day(s)

Codlea and Timișoara Prisons

30/01/2020 to

21/12/2020

10 month(s) and 22 day(s)

Timișoara and Codlea Prisons

11/01/2021 to

20/05/2021

4 month(s) and 10 day(s)

Codlea Prison

04/06/2021 to

06/09/2021

3 month(s) and 3 day(s)

Codlea Prison

10/09/2021

pending

More than 1 year(s) and 3 day(s)

1.93 - 2.94 m²

overcrowding (save for the periods 30/01/2020 - 13/02/2020, 01/09/2021 - 06/09/2021 and 13/09/2021 - 05/01/2022), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water

3,000

21031/18

24/04/2018

Tiberiu BUDAI

1984Arad and Timișoara Prisons

22/06/2017 to

02/03/2022

4 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 9 day(s)

2.04 - 2.70 m²

overcrowding (save for the periods 22/06/2017 - 25/08/2020 and 22/09/2020 - 13/08/2021), lack or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to warm water, lack of toiletries, poor quality of food

3,000

21069/19

03/04/2019

Alin NOVAC

1985Botoșani Prison

28 periods between 07/01/2014 and 25/07/2017 in the total amount of

4 years(s) and 8 month(s) and 5 day(s)

1.90 - 2.85 m²

overcrowding (save for the period 01/11/2016 - 22/12/2016), lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water, inadequate temperature

354 days in compensation for a total period of 1,790 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 22/12/2019, including the periods spent in Botoșani Prison except for the periods in column no. 5

3,000

63585/19

16/01/2020

Constantin-Cristi POPA

1989Mioveni Prison

23/12/2019 to

24/02/2020

2 month(s) and 2 day(s)

2.59 - 2.64 m²

overcrowding (save for the period 04/02/2020 - 24/02/2020), lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water, mouldy or dirty cell

186 days in compensation for a total period of 957 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions from 21/04/2017 to 22/12/2019 in Mioveni and Târgu Jiu Prisons, except for the days spent in prison hospitals, infirmary, and transit rooms

1,000

[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

Menu

CASE OF VITAN AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

CASE OF VITAN AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

LEXI