Communicated on 11 July 2014

THIRD SECTION

Application no. 12009/14 Justin Ovidiu PARASCHIV against Romania lodged on 4 February 2014

STATEMENT OF FACTS

The applicant, Mr Justin Ovidiu Paraschiv , is a Romanian national, who was born in 1981 and lives in Ploie ÅŸ ti . He is represented before the Court by Mr G. MateuÈ› , a lawyer practising in Arad .

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

In a decision of 8 November 2013 the High Court of Cassation and Justice, acting on a request lodged by the prosecutor, ordered that the applicant be placed in pre-trial detention under suspicion of participating in organised crime and tax evasion.

On 9 November 2013 the applicant was placed in pre-trial detention in Bucharest Police Detention Facility No. 12. He described the conditions of his detention as follows. He was sharing a 22 sq. m cell with four other persons, although the room was designed to accommodate only four inmates. Being the fifth inmate in the cell, the applicant had to sleep on an old mattress placed directly on the floor, as an improvised bed. One of the other inmates from the cell suffered from HIV infection, C hepatitis and consumption.

The cell was not heated or ventilated properly. In addition, as it was in the basement , the walls were mouldy and the natural light scarce. The cell was provided with a squat toilet, with a sink and shower on top of it; the sanitary facilities measured all together 1.5 sq. m and were not separated from the living space which was therefore foul-smelling. The detainees had no intimacy when using the facility. In addition, the cell was positioned under the police parking lot, which was noisy and also smelled bad. This disturbed the detainees ’ sleep and prevented them from airing their cell properly.

The recreation area consisted of a 10.5 sq. m room which also served as drying room. Inmates from one cell were taken into it all at the same time. Because there were always drying clothes, there was no real possibility for walking.

The applicant further described that he was transported to and from the court in police vans which did not benefit from natural light and were not heated. After such a transport, the applicant would have to wait for seven to eight hours outside the court building or on corridors, as there were no facilities where the detained persons could wait for their case to be heard by the court.

The applicant was released from detention on 12 February 2014, based on a decision rendered by the Bucharest Court of Appeal.

COMPLAINTS

The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of detention in Bucharest Police Detention Facility No. 12 and about the conditions of transport to and from the court .

QUESTION S TO THE PARTIES

1. Were the conditions of the applicant ’ s detention in the police detention facilities in breach of the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention?

2. Were the conditions of the applicant ’ s transport between the detention facilities and courts in breach of the requirements of Article 3 of the Convention?

The Government are invited to provide information on the material conditions of detention and transport.