Published on 6 December 2021

FIRST SECTION

Application no. 34180/20 Andrzej MICHALSKI against Poland lodged on 23 October 2020 communicated on 17 November 2021

STATEMENT OF FACTS

1. The applicant, Mr Andrzej Michalski, is a Polish national, who was born in 1978 and is currently detained in Hrubieszów Prison.

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

3. The applicant was a prisoner committed to Zamość Prison.

4. On 18 March 2020 a general ban on family visits was introduced in the applicant’s prison, based on the prison governor’s order issued in connection with the Covid-19 pandemic. The order was based on Section 13 (1) and (3) of the 2010 Law on Prison Services ( Ustawa o Służbie Więziennej ), Article 247 § 1 of the Code of Enforcement of Prison Sentences ( Kodeks karny wykonawczy ) and Section 1 of the Minister of Health’s Ordinance of 20 March 2020 on the State of the Pandemic ( Rozporządzenie Ministra Zdrowia w sprawie ogłoszenia na obszarze Rzeczypospolitej Polskiej stanu epidemii - “the Health Minister’s Ordinance”).

5. The governor’s original order, dated 17 March 2020, was to remain in force for seven days. It was extended by subsequent orders (dated 24 March, 7 and 21 April, 5 and 19 May, 2, 16 and 30 June, 14 July 2020) until 29 July 2020.

6. From 30 July until 16 October 2020 prisoners could receive restricted family visits, namely the visit of one adult family member once per month. The visits were socially distanced and additional Covid-19 safety measures were put in place.

7. On 17 October 2020 a new general ban on family visits was introduced, based on the prison governor’s order (dated 16 October 2020) in connection with the Covid-19 pandemic. The ban was extended by subsequent orders dated 23 and 30 October, 13 and 27 November, 17 December 2020, 14 and 28 January and 11 and 25 February 2021. It is unknown whether two orders on the ban’s extension were also issued in March 2021. Visits continued to be prohibited based on the governor’s orders of 8 and 22 April and of 6 May 2021.

8. From 1 until 16 July 2021 prisoners could receive restricted family visits, namely a non-distanced visit from one adult family member. From 16 June until 18 July 2021 visits were extended to children and two adult family members. The governor explained that relaxing the restrictions was possible given that only 0.04% of prisoners were Covid positive, that 70% of prison staff had received at least one dose of a Covid vaccine and that vaccination of prisoners was underway.

9. Since 19 July 2021 prisoners have been able to receive family visits pursuant to the general regulation, namely Article 105 (a) of the Code of the Execution of Criminal Sentences, with additional Covid-19 safety measures in place.

10. On 21 May 2020 the applicant applied to the prison administration, asking for the revocation of the ban on family visits and to be granted a family visit either on the prison premises or outside.

11. On 10 June 2021 the prison governor rejected this application, explaining that the ban was lawful and necessary given the Covid-19 pandemic.

12. The applicant appealed against that decision, arguing that the protracted interruption of his contact with his family was very harsh for him. The applicant also argued that he was discriminated against because of his prisoner’s status, given that the population at large could enjoy social contact – for example, it was possible to attend football matches, weddings and other social gatherings.

13. On 29 September 2020 the Zamość Regional Court ( Sąd Okręgowy ) rejected the applicant’s appeal, observing that the restriction of family visits was necessary to limit the spread of Covid-19 in prison facilities.

COMPLAINT

14. The applicant complains that the long-lasting prohibition of family visits in prison was in breach of his right to respect for his private and family life guaranteed by Article 8 of the Convention.

QUESTION TO THE PARTIES

Has there been a violation of the applicant’s right to respect for his private and family life, contrary to Article 8 of the Convention (see, mutatis mutandis , Kuimov v. Russia , no. 32147/04, § 103, 8 January 2009)?