FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 11749/21 Mădălin Alin NĂSTĂSESCU against Portugal and 2 other applications

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 29 June 2023 as a Committee composed of:

Tim Eicke , President , Branko Lubarda, Ana Maria Guerra Martins , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications 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 applicants 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 Portuguese Government (“the Government”). In application no. 15761/21, the applicant also complained about a lack of a remedy at domestic level in respect of conditions of detention.

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.

In the present applications, having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the complaints about the conditions of detention are inadmissible.

The applicants were detained in different prison facilities. During their last, most recent and/or entire period of detention, the applicants were detained at Lisbon Central Prison (applications nos. 11749/21 and 17611/21) and Pinheiro da Cruz Prison (application no. 15761/21).

Having regard to all the available material and the parties’ arguments, the Court finds that it cannot establish that the applicants suffered in these prison facilities from severe overcrowding of the kind that could entail, on its own, a violation of Article 3 (see Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, 20 October 2016) nor can it be found that the cumulative effect of the other aspects of the detention which the applicants complained about reached the threshold of severity required to characterise the treatment as inhumane or degrading within the meaning of Article 3 (see Bokor v. Portugal , (dec.) no. 5227/18, § 34, 10 December 2020).

It follows that the complaints concerning these periods of detention in the facilities indicated above (for further detains see the appended table) are manifestly ill-founded and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 a) and 4 of the Convention.

Concerning application no. 15761/21, in light of the conclusion above, the Court finds that the applicant’s transfer to Pinheiro da Cruz prison on 20 July 2015 interrupted the “continuing situation” of his conditions of detention. Therefore, the applicant’s complaints concerning his conditions of detention prior to this prison transfer are belated (see Ananyev and Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 75-78, 10 January 2012). Accordingly, these complaints must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

Under Article 13 of the Convention, the applicant in application no. 15761/21 complained of the lack of an effective remedy in respect of his conditions of detention. The Court notes that, according to its established case-law, Article 13 of the Convention applied only where an individual has an “arguable claim” to be victim of a violation of a Convention right (see Boyle and Rice v. the United Kingdom , 27 April 1988, § 52, Series A no. 131, and Narcisio v. Netherlands (dec.), no. 47810/99, 27 January 2005). Having regard to the findings above as to the applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention about his conditions of detention, the Court concludes that they are not “arguable” for the purpose of Article 13.

It follows that this part of the application 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.

Done in English and notified in writing on 20 July 2023.

Viktoriya Maradudina Tim Eicke 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

Other complaints under well ‑ established case-law

11749/21

19/04/2021

Mădălin Alin NĂSTĂSESCU

1993--

Lisbon Central Prison

19/08/2020 to

07/07/2021

10 months and 19 days

1 inmate

7.14 m²

1 toilet

lack of or insufficient electric light, lack or inadequate furniture, infringement of sanitary regulations, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities

--

15761/21

05/03/2021

Miguel Ângelo PAIVA BORDA DE ÁGUA

1989Vítor Carreto

Torres Vedras

Beja Prison

05/03/2012 to

25/07/2015

3 years and 4 months and 21 days

***

Pinheiro da Cruz

20/07/2015 to

12/10/2018

3 years and 2 months and 18 days

Pinheiro da Cruz

12/10/2018 to

27/07/2021

2 years and 9 months and 16 days

5 inmates

3.27 m²

1 toilet

***

1 inmate

5.64 m²

1 toilet

3 inmates

5.50 m²

1 toilet

overcrowding, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy

***

lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food

idem

Art. 13 - lack of any effective remedy in domestic law in respect of inadequate conditions of detention

17611/21

28/07/2021

Igor OLIVEIRA ANDRADE

1993Ulisses de Sousa

Amadora

Lisbon Central Prison

28/09/2020

pending

More than 2 years and 7 months and 28 days

1 inmate

7.14 m²

1 toilet

mouldy or dirty cell, inadequate temperature, poor quality of food, absence of an alarm system in the cell

--