Communicated on 21 March 2014
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 24125/09
Gigel DĂSCĂLESCU
against Romania
lodged on 27 April 2009
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. The applicant, Mr Gigel Dăscălescu, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1966 and lives in Valea Calugareasca.
2. The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
3. In 1993 the applicant was convicted to twenty years’ imprisonment for homicide.
4. Between 24 November 2004 and 12 November 2008 the applicant served his sentence in Arad Prison.
5. The applicant alleges that he was taking his daily three hour walk in an outside courtyard which was not provided with access to toilets or water. Especially during the hot days of summer, the situation could have been described as inhuman and humiliating because he was forced to satisfy his physiological needs, together with other prisoners along the fences of the courtyard, in the same place where they were supposed to walk and breathe fresh air. The applicant’s numerous complaints in this respect to the Arad Prison administration and even to the prosecutors were either overlooked or given the reply that renovation works which would solve this issue were planned for the future.
6. On 16 July 2008 the judge responsible for the execution of sentences in Arad Prison rejected a complaint on the same matter raised by the applicant. The judge held that Law no. 276 of 2006 on the execution of sentences did not provide for the right to have access to sanitary facilities and water during the prisoners’ daily outside walk.
7. Invoking the provisions concerning the prisoners’ right to daily walk set forth by Law no. 276 of 2006 as well as the provisions of Article 3 of the Convention, the applicant complained against the above-mentioned decision before the Arad District Court. He also requested non-pecuniary damages for the inhuman treatment he had been suffering during his daily walk since 24 November 2004 in Arad Prison.
8. In a final judgment of 28 October 2008 the Arad District Court allowed the applicant’s complaint and ordered the Arad Prison administration to ensure the applicant’s right to daily walk in a courtyard provided with sanitary facilities and drinking water. The applicant’s request for damages was rejected as being out of time since it had not been firstly raised before the judge responsible for the execution of sentences.
9. In the meanwhile, on 23 October 2008 the judge responsible for the execution of sentences in Arad Prison rejected a request for non-pecuniary damages made by the applicant in respect of another alleged breach of his rights, holding that he was not competent to deal with requests for damages.
10. According to the applicant, the final judgment of 28 October 2008 of the Arad District Court was never enforced by the prison authorities.
11. On 12 November 2008 the applicant was conditionally released from prison.
COMPLAINT
12. The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention that he was subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment due to the conditions of his detention in Arad Prison. More specifically, he complains that he was forced to take his daily walk in a courtyard with no access to sanitary facilities and drinking water, where he was forced to satisfy his physiological needs together with other prisoners along the fence of the yard, and that during the summer months the smell was unbearable. Finally, he complains that he was unable to obtain compensation for this breach of his Article 3 rights.
QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES
1. Has the applicant exhausted all effective domestic remedies, as required by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention, with regard to the material conditions of his detention in Arad Prison?
2. Assuming that there was no effective remedy under domestic law, has the applicant been subjected to inhuman or degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of the conditions of his detention in Arad Prison?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy