FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 20069/21 Marco Filipe DA SILVA MACIEL against Portugal

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 14 September 2023 as a Committee composed of:

Faris Vehabović , President , Anja Seibert-Fohr, Anne Louise Bormann , judges ,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above application lodged on 5 April 2021,

Having regard to the declaration submitted by the respondent Government requesting the Court to strike the application out of the list of cases; and

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 applicant’s details are set out in the appended table.

The applicant was represented by Mr V. Carreto, a lawyer practising in Torres Vedras.

The applicant’s complaints under Articles 3 and 13 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention and lack of an effective remedy in this respect were communicated to the Portuguese Government (“the Government”).

THE LAW

The Government informed the Court that they proposed to make a unilateral declaration with a view to resolving the issues raised by these complaints concerning the applicant’s conditions of detention in Pinheiro da Cruz Prison during two periods between 15 March and 23 May 2022 and between 7 September to 5 October 2022. They acknowledged the violation of the Convention, offered to pay the applicant the amounts detailed in the appended table and invited the Court to strike the application out in this part of the list of cases in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention. The amounts would be payable within three months from the date of notification of the Court’s decision. In the event of failure to pay these amounts within the abovementioned three-month period, the Government will be under an obligation to pay simple interest on them, from the expiry of that period until settlement, at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.

The applicant was sent the terms of the Government’s unilateral declaration. He disagreed with it.

The Court observes that Article 37 § 1 (c) enables it to strike a case out of its list if:

“... for any other reason established by the Court, it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application”.

Thus, it may strike out applications under Article 37 § 1 (c) on the basis of a unilateral declaration by a respondent Government even if the applicant wishes the examination of the case to be continued (see, in particular, the Tahsin Acar v. Turkey judgment (preliminary objections) [GC], no. 26307/95, §§ 75 ‑ 77, ECHR 2003-VI).

The Court has established clear and extensive case-law concerning complaints relating to the inadequate conditions of detention (see, for example, Petrescu v. Portugal, no. 23190/17, 3 December 2019).

Noting the admissions contained in the Government’s declaration as well as the amount of compensation proposed – which is consistent with the amounts awarded in similar cases – the Court considers that it is no longer justified to continue the examination of the application in the part covered by the unilateral declaration (Article 37 § 1 (c)).

In the light of the above considerations, the Court is satisfied that respect for human rights as defined in the Convention and the Protocols thereto does not require it to continue the examination of the application in the part covered by the unilateral declaration (Article 37 § 1 in fine ).

Finally, the Court emphasises that, should the Government fail to comply with the terms of their unilateral declaration, the application may be restored to the list in accordance with Article 37 § 2 of the Convention (see Josipović v. Serbia (dec.), no. 18369/07, 4 March 2008).

In view of the above, it is appropriate to strike the case out of the list in the part related to the complaints under the Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention in Pinheiro da Cruz Prison during the periods between 15 March and 23 May 2022 and between 7 September to 5 October 2022.

The applicant also raised complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning other periods of detention in Setúbal Prison and Pinheiro da Cruz Prison. Relying on Article 13 of the Convention, he further complained of a lack of an effective domestic remedy to complain about detention conditions.

The Court 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 application must be declared inadmissible and rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Takes note of the terms of the respondent Government’s declaration in so far as it concerns the applicant’s conditions of detention in Pinheiro da Cruz Prison and of the arrangements for ensuring compliance with the undertakings referred to therein;

Decides to strike the application out of its list of cases in the part covered by the unilateral declaration of the Government in accordance with Article 37 § 1 (c) of the Convention.

Declares the remainder of the application inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 5 October 2023.

Viktoriya Maradudina Faris Vehabović Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

Application raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

(inadequate conditions of detention)

Application no. Date of introduction

Applicant’s name

Year of birth

Representative’s name and location

Date of receipt of Government’s declaration

Date of receipt of applicant’s comments

Amount awarded for non-pecuniary damage (in euros) [1]

Amount awarded for costs and expenses per application

(in euros) [2]

20069/21

05/04/2021

Marco Filipe DA SILVA MACIEL

1976Vítor Carreto

Torres Vedras

15/02/2023

26/02/2023

2,000

250[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.

[2] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicant.