Communicated on 15 April 2015

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 56122/14 Marius Cezar ŞUŢĂ against Romania lodged on 8 October 2014

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Marius Cezar Şuţă , is a Romanian national, who was born in 1974 . He is currently detained in Giurgiu Prison.

A. The circumstances of the case

The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.

1 . Overcrowding

On an unspecified date, in 2014, t he applicant complained to the post ‑ sentencing judge responsible for the surveillance of prison sentences ( judecătorul de supraveghere a privării de libertate ) that since 10 May 2013 he had been detained in an overcrowded cell of 17.65 sq. m, with five other inmates.

On 4 February 2014, the number of persons detained in that cell went down to four, including the applicant.

Consequently, on 4 March 2014, the judge dismissed the applicant ’ s complaint on the ground that his detention conditions were in accordance with the domestic regulations (4 sq . m per person). The judge noted that he only had the power to request, from the Prison authorities, that action be taken in favour of the applicant. This judgment was upheld by the Giurgiu First Instance Court on 1 October 2014.

The applicant does not appear to have taken any action before the competent domestic courts in order to claim compensation in this respect.

From 25 April to 21 May 2014, the applicant shared the same cell, measuring 17.65 sq . m, with five other inmates.

He subsequently filed a new complaint with the post-sentencing judge in the Giurgiu Prison.

By the date the post- sentencing judge decided on his second complaint, namely by 11 August 2014, the applicant had been moved to a cell where he had sufficient living space, exceeding 4 sq . m. Consequently his complaint was dismissed.

2 . Sanitary conditions

On an unspecified date, in early 2014, t he applicant separately complained to the post ‑ sentencing judge that he had not been given toiletries, including toilet paper, soap, tooth brush, tooth paste and disposable razors, despite the requirements of the domestic regulations in this respect.

On 10 March 2014, the judge allowed the applicant ’ s complaint, after finding that, according to the Prison authorities ’ own statement, in 2013, he had been given an insufficient quantity of toiletries. Moreover, in 2014, the applicant had not been given any of these items, because of an alleged lack of funds. The judge noted, among other findings, that the applicant had received only 2 rolls of toilet paper in 8 months (from May to December 2013) and none in the first two months of 2014. Consequently, the judge required the Prison authorities to provide the applicant with toiletries, in accordance with the Order no. 2056/2007 of the Minister of Justice .

This judgment was upheld by the Giurgi u First Instance Court on 6 May 2014.

B. Relevant domestic and international law and practice

Excerpts from the relevant domestic legislation in force before 1 February 2014 (the Law no. 275/2006 on the serving of prison sentences ) are given in Iacov Stanciu v. Romania (no. 35972/05, §§ 116- 117, 24 July 2012).

Law no. 275/2006 was replaced by Law no. 254/2013, in force since 1 February 2014.

Order no. 2056/2007 of the Minister of Justice provides for the quantity of toiletries – namely toilet paper, soap, tooth brush, tooth paste and disposable razors – to be provided monthly to any detained person.

T he reports of the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (“CPT”) and Recommendation Rec(2006)2 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe to member States – on prison conditions are quoted in Iacov Stanciu (cited above, §§ 120-126).

In its last report ( CPT/ Inf (2011) 31) published on 24 November 2011 following a visit from 5 to 16 September 2010 to a number of detention facilities in Romania, the CPT expressed concerns over the limited living space available to prisoners.

COMPLAINT

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that the conditions of his detention in Giurgiu Prison had been degrading because of the overcrowding and the lack of toiletries from May 2013 until February 2014 .

QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES

1. Has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of the conditions of his detention in Giurgiu Prison?

2. The Government are invited to submit information concerning the conditions of the applicant ’ s detention in Giurgiu Prison , in particular as regards the overcrowding and hygiene in particular with regard to hygienic items supply .