FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF BURCICĂ AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 29536/16 and 9 others – see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
21 January 2021
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Burcică and Others v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Armen Harutyunyan, President,
Jolien Schukking,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 17 December 2020,
Delivers the following judgment, which was adopted on that date:
PROCEDURE
1. The case originated in applications against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table.
2. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were given notice of the applications.
THE FACTS
3. The list of applicants and the relevant details of the applications are set out in the appended table.
4. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention.
THE LAWJOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
5. Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6. The applicants complained of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention, which reads as follows:
Article 3
“No one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.”
7. The Government argued that all applicants had lost their victim status for periods of detention as indicated in the appended table. They claimed that the applicants had been afforded adequate redress based on Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences for those respective periods of detention.
8. The Court has already found that the domestic remedy introduced in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romania and applicable until December 2019 was an effective one (see Dîrjan and Ştefan v. Romania (dec.), nos. 14224/15 and 50977/15, §§ 23-33, 15 April 2020). This remedy was available to the applicants in the present applications and they were, indeed, afforded adequate redress for certain periods of detention (for details see the appended table).
9. Therefore, the Court accepts the Government’s objection and finds that these parts of the applications are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
10. Turning to the remaining periods of the applicants’ detention, the Court notes that the applicants were kept in detention in poor conditions. The details of the applicants’ detention are indicated in the appended table. The Court refers to the principles established in its case‑law regarding inadequate conditions of detention (see, for instance, Muršić v. Croatia [GC], no. 7334/13, §§ 96‑101, ECHR 2016). It reiterates in particular that a serious lack of space in a prison cell weighs heavily as a factor to be taken into account for the purpose of establishing whether the detention conditions described are “degrading” under Article 3 of the Convention and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122 ‑141, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149‑159, 10 January 2012).
11. In the leading case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017, the Court has already found a violation in respect of issues similar to those in the present case.
12. Having examined all the material submitted to it, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility and merits of these complaints. Having regard to its case-law on the subject, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate.
13. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.REMAINING COMPLAINTS
14. In applications nos. 41188/16, 59849/16 and 60625/16, the applicants also raised complaints under Article 3 of the Convention in relation to periods of detention preceding the start dates specified in the appended table.
15. The Court has examined these applications and 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 do not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Article 35 § 1 of the Convention as they were lodged outside the six-month time-limit.
It follows that this part of the applications nos. 41188/16, 59849/16 and 60625/16 must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
16. Article 41 of the Convention provides:
“If the Court finds that there has been a violation of the Convention or the Protocols thereto, and if the internal law of the High Contracting Party concerned allows only partial reparation to be made, the Court shall, if necessary, afford just satisfaction to the injured party.”
17. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
18. The Court further considers it appropriate that the default interest rate should be based on the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank, to which should be added three percentage points.
FOR THESE REASONS, THE COURT, UNANIMOUSLY,Decides to join the applications;Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, as specified in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of the applications inadmissible;Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;Holds
(a) that the respondent State is to pay the applicants, within three months, the amounts indicated in the appended table, to be converted into the currency of the respondent State at the rate applicable at the date of settlement;
(b) that from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement simple interest shall be payable on the above amounts at a rate equal to the marginal lending rate of the European Central Bank during the default period plus three percentage points.
Done in English, and notified in writing on 21 January 2021, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv TigerstedtArmen Harutyunyan
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
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
Domestic compensation awarded (in days)
based on total period calculated domestically
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage per applicant
(in euros)[1]
29536/16
18/10/2016
Cristian-Marian BURCICĂ
1987
Mioveni Prison
03/11/2019 – pending
More than 1 year and 28 days
2.5 m²
overcrowding, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities
390 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 24/06/2014 to 03/11/2019
3,000
33663/16
05/08/2016
Nicolae-Petrică CUȚITAR
1981
Irina Maria Peter
Bucharest
Aiud, Deva, Miercurea Ciuc and Arad Prisons
13/10/2005 to 13/05/2013
7 years and 7 months and 1 day
Arad Prison
29/03/2018 to 04/04/2018
7 days
Arad Prison
01/10/2018 to 07/03/2019
5 months and 7 days
1.17-2.74 m²
overcrowding (for the following periods: 13/10/2005 to 04/04/2008, 10/04/2008 to 29/07/2008 and 13/05/2009 to 21/10/2011), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, no or restricted access to toilet, no or restricted access to shower, mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air
390 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 13/05/2013 to 29/03/2018, 11/04/2018 to 01/10/2018 and 08/03/2019 to 21/05/2019
5,000
41188/16
22/08/2016
Ion MARCU
1954
Giurgiu Prison
31/01/2019 – pending
More than 1 year and 10 months and 1 day
no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food, lack or inadequate furniture, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, bunk beds, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, constant electric light, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient natural light
462 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 31/01/2019
3,000
41368/16
12/09/2016
Vasilică NĂSTRUȘNICU
1982
Iasi County Police Station and Arad, Gherla, Iasi and Jilava Prisons
28/02/2004 to 24/07/2012
8 years and 4 months and 27 days
1.16-2.66 m²
overcrowding, bunk beds, no or restricted access to toilet, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, mouldy or dirty cell, insufficient number of sleeping places, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food
534 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 10/12/2019
5,000
42388/16
06/02/2017
Carol HORVATH
1975
Vasile Rareș Biro
Satu Mare
Jilava Prison- Infirmary
31/07/2015 to 17/08/2015
18 days
Dej Prison Hospital
03/11/2015 to 08/12/2015
1 month and 6 days
Dej Prison Hospital
24/03/2016 to 12/04/2016
20 days
Dej Prison Hospital
18/07/2016 to 23/08/2016
1 month and 6 days
Dej Prison Hospital
22/09/2016 to 30/09/2016
9 days
lack of fresh air, mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, bunk beds, lack or inadequate furniture, no or restricted access to shower, no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food, no or restricted access to toilet
138 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 08/07/2015 to 28/11/2017, except for the periods referred to in Column no. 5 (Facility, Start and end date, Duration).
1,000
52497/16
30/09/2016
Florin GHIȚULESCU
1980
Arad, Rahova and Mărgineni Prisons
20/05/2011 to 06/02/2013
1 year and 8 months and 18 days
Arad and Mărgineni Prisons
27/05/2013 to 20/12/2013
6 months and 24 days
Mărgineni Prison
19/02/2014 to 04/03/2014
14 days
Arad Prison and Dej Prison Hospital
22/08/2014 – pending
More than 6 years and 3 months and 10 days
1.45-1.90 m²
overcrowding (for the following periods: 20/05/2011-08/09/2011 and 28/09/2011-08/06/2012)
infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, bunk beds, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to potable water, no or restricted access to running water, inadequate temperature, poor quality of food
54 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 06/02/2013 to 27/05/2013, from 20/12/2013 to 19/02/2014 and from 04/03/2014 to 22/08/2014
5,000
59849/16
31/01/2017
Mihai BALINT
1948
Arad Prison
08/09/2016 to 12/06/2017
9 months and 5 days
Arad Prison
23/06/2017 to 12/10/2017
3 months and 20 days
Arad Prison
23/10/2017 to 18/01/2018
2 months and 27 days
mouldy or dirty cell, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, bunk beds, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack or inadequate furniture, poor quality of food
414 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 10/12/2019, except for the periods referred to in Column no. 5 (Facility, Start and end date, Duration).
3,000
60625/16
02/11/2016
Ionel TĂNASE
1980
Mioveni Prison
10/11/2019 – pending
More than 1 year and 21 days
2.22 m²
overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, inadequate temperature, lack of fresh air, lack of or insufficient electric light, lack of or insufficient natural light, no or restricted access to warm water
522 days in compensation for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 06/03/2012 to 30/08/2012, from 27/09/2012 to 09/09/2014 and from 07/10/2014 to 10/11/2019
3,000
61915/16
11/11/2016
Mihai-Cristian HATNEAN
1972
Iași Prison
21/11/2019 – pending
More than 1 year and 10 days
mouldy or dirty cell, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of privacy for toilet, no or restricted access to running water, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack or inadequate furniture, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, no or restricted access to shower, bunk beds, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack or insufficient quantity of food, poor quality of food
480 days in compensation
for a total period of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions from 21/02/2013 to 21/11/2019
3,000
62484/16
19/10/2016
George VASILE
1976
Calarasi County Police Station and Jilava, Aiud, Poarta Alba, Craiova, Tulcea, Miercurea Ciuc and Arad Prisons
09/03/2005 – pending
More than 15 years and 8 months and 22 days
no or restricted access to toilet, poor quality of food, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, no or restricted access to warm water, insufficient number of sleeping places, inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of toiletries, lack or insufficient quantity of food, no or restricted access to potable water, lack of privacy for toilet, lack or inadequate furniture
30 days in compensation
for a total period of 165 days of
detention spent in
inadequate conditions (period not specified by the parties)
5,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy