FOURTH SECTION
CASE OF PICHIU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 26559/16 and 9 others –
see appended list)
JUDGMENT
STRASBOURG
15 December 2022
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.
In the case of Pichiu and Others v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Armen Harutyunyan, President,
Anja Seibert-Fohr,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 25 November 2022,
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 LAW
JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS5. 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 CONVENTION6. The applicants complained principally 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. In applications nos. 26559/16, 45842/16, 55124/16 and 64348/16, the Government raised a preliminary objection concerning the loss of victim status by the applicants for the periods of detention specified in the appended table because they were afforded adequate redress based on Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences for those specific periods of detention.
8. The Court notes that the domestic remedy introduced in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romania and applicable until December 2019 was held to be an effective one in the case of 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 applications nos. 26559/16, 45842/16, 55124/16 and 64348/16, 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 applications nos. 26559/16, 45842/16, 55124/16 and 64348/16 are incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention and must be declared inadmissible in accordance with Article 35 §§ 3 (a) and 4 of the Convention.
10. Turning to the remaining periods of the applicants’ detention as specified in the appended table, 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” from the point of view of Article 3 and may disclose a violation, both alone or taken together with other shortcomings (see Muršić, cited above, §§ 122‑41, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149‑59, 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 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 (including its findings in the case of Polgar v. Romania, no. 39412/19, §§ 94-97, 20 July 2021), the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention, as described in the appended table, were inadequate.
13. These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
REMAINING COMPLAINTS14. In applications nos. 26559/16, 45842/16, 55124/16, 64348/16 and 74237/16, the applicants also raised other complaints under Article 3 of the Convention.
15. The Court has examined the applications listed in the appended table 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 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.
16. It follows that this part of the applications must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION17. 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.”
18. Regard being had to the documents in its possession and to its case‑law (see, in particular, Rezmiveș and Others, cited above), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
19. 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, for the periods 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 for the periods specified in the appended table below;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 15 December 2022, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Viktoriya Maradudina Armen Harutyunyan
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
Domestic compensation awarded
(in days)
based on total period calculated by national authorities
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]
26559/16
16/01/2017
Ioan Daniel PICHIU
1982
Botoşani Prison
24/11/2016 to
09/12/2016
16 day(s)
Botoşani Prison
14/03/2017 to
16/03/2017
3 day(s)
Găeşti and Iaşi Prisons
23/12/2019
pending
More than 2 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 4 day(s)
2.92 m²
overcrowding, bunk beds, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, inadequate temperature, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, mouldy or dirty cell
444 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions from 16/09/2013 to 22/12/2019, apart from the periods mentioned in column 5.
3,000
34393/16
13/09/2016
Viorel GUȘATU
1982
Teleorman Police; Jilava, Giurgiu and Târgu-Jiu Prisons
17/12/2013 to
20/12/2016
3 year(s) and 4 day(s)
1.2-2.9 m²
overcrowding (save for 09/03/2016, 05/04/2016, 11-18/04/2016, 29/08/2016-02/09/2016, 08/09/2016-10/10/2016, 31/10/2016-07/11/2016), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, mouldy or dirty cell, poor quality of potable water
3,000
45842/16
26/08/2016
Chiriţă ŞELARU
1955
Boghină Carmen
Bucharest
Craiova Prison
24/06/2010 to
19/05/2011
10 month(s) and 26 day(s)
Craiova Prison
26/05/2011 to
23/07/2012
1 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 28 day(s)
1.25-2.2 m²
overcrowding (save for 22/10/2010 and 26/10/2010), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to warm water, poor quality of food
324 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 16/01/2018, including the entire time spent in Craiova and Pelendava Prisons.
3,000
46719/16
12/10/2016
Marius-Viorel SĂRBAN
1973
Jilava and Giurgiu Prisons
29/10/2019
pending
More than 2 year(s) and 11 month(s) and 28 day(s)
2.72-2.83 m²
overcrowding (save for 17/03/2020-pending), bunk beds, inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell
3,000
47932/16
04/08/2016
Dorel PĂUN
1972
Pleşea Mihaela
Bucharest
Focșani Prison
10/03/2016 to
13/12/2016
9 month(s) and 4 day(s)
1.42-1.79 m²
overcrowding, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient quantity of food, mouldy or dirty cell, poor quality of food
1,000
55124/16
15/11/2016
Robert-Telegin SIBIȘAN
1978
Alba County Police; Aiud, Rahova, Jilava, Iaşi, Arad and Gherla Prisons; Jilava Prison Hospital
09/02/1999 to
23/07/2012
13 year(s) and 5 month(s) and 15 day(s)
Deva and Aiud Prisons
23/12/2019
pending
More than 2 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 4 day(s)
1.86-2.74 m²
overcrowding (save for 16/03/2005-05/04/2007, 23/12/2019-27/08/2020, 24/09/2020-09/06/2022), inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower
534 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 22/12/2019.
5,000
64348/16
11/01/2017
Irco TRIŞCĂ
1983
Hunedoara County Police; Deva, Aiud, Rahova, Giurgiu, Gherla and Oradea Prisons; Dej and Jilava Prison Hospitals
12/12/2008 to
23/07/2012
3 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 12 day(s)
Arad and Aiud Prisons; Dej Prison Hospital
27/06/2016
pending
More than 6 year(s) and 3 month(s) and 27 day(s)
1.03-2.74 m²
overcrowding (save for 03-14/07/2009, 02-19/08/2010, 04-22/10/2010, 17-24/02/2011, 28/06/2012-23/07/2013 and 27/06/2016-pending), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower, lack or inadequate furniture
288 days in compensation for a total period of detention spent in inadequate conditions from 24/07/2012 to 27/06/2016.
5,000
66557/16
04/11/2016
Emilian DOROJAN
1987
Mărgărit Ionela
Bucharest
Galaţi County Police; Galaţi, Slobozia, Rahova, Brăila and Tulcea Prisons; the Outer Section Chilia-Veche of Tulcea Prison; Poarta Albă Prison Hospital
04/05/2012 to
13/06/2017
5 year(s) and 1 month(s) and 10 day(s)
1.2-2.44 m²
overcrowding (save for 06-13/09/2012, 20-27/05/2013, 30/09/2015-01/10/2015,
28/10/2015-04/04/2016, 12/06/2016-13/09/2016), bunk beds, inadequate temperature, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, poor quality of potable water
5,000
74237/16
23/12/2016
George STANCU
1979
Iaşi Prison
11/11/2011 to
23/07/2012
8 month(s) and 13 day(s)
Botoşani, Iaşi and Găeşti Prisons
23/12/2019
pending
More than 2 year(s) and 10 month(s) and 4 day(s)
1.83-2.12 m²
overcrowding (save for 12/02/2020-pending), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, poor quality of food
3,000
63099/19
23/12/2019
Alin-George STANCIU
1983
Codlea, Miercurea Ciuc and Aiud Prisons
23/12/2019 to
18/10/2020
9 month(s) and 26 day(s)
2.04-2.99 m²
overcrowding (save for 20/02/2020-25/06/2020 and 14/07/2020-18/10/2020), infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to shower, poor quality of food
1,000
[1] Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.