Communicated on 17 April 2014
THIRD SECTION
Application no. 55842/13
Ionel MOISII against Romania
lodged on 27 July 2013
STATEMENT OF FACTS
The applicant, Mr Ionel Moisii, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1971. He is currently detained in Tulcea Prison.
A. The circumstances of the case
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 12 February 2013 the applicant was detained in the Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest (Centrul de Reținere şi Arestare Preventivă Iaşi).
On 19 February 2013 the applicant opened proceedings against the Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest before the post-sentencing judge complaining that the detention cells were not fitted with a bathroom.
By a decision of 16 April 2013 the post-sentencing judge attached to Iaşi Prison dismissed the applicant’s complaint. It held that although the Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest’s detention cells were not fitted with sanitary facilities, the detainees were taken by the guards to a common sanitary facility every time they needed. The applicant appealed against the decision before the domestic courts.
By a final judgment of 14 August 2013 the Iaşi District Court allowed the applicant’s appeal and quashed the decision of the post-sentencing judge. It held on the basis of the testimonial and documentary evidence submitted by both the applicant and the Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest that the detention cells were not fitted with sanitary facilities and that the detainees were taken to a common sanitary facility by the guards. The emergencies were treated with priority upon request. Consequently, the applicant’s right to individual and collective hygiene had been breached.
In his initial letter the applicant informed the Court that the detention cells in Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest were not fitted with a bathroom or a sink. Consequently, he had no access to drinking water and was forced to share a common sanitary facility. Moreover, he had to satisfy his physiological needs in a plastic bottle which he had been forced to store in his cell overnight and during the day because he was taken to the bathroom only twice a day.
B. Relevant domestic law
Article 38 of Law no. 275/2006 on the execution of sentences provides for an appeal to be lodged with the post-sentencing judge, who has the powers described in Article 3 § 5 of Ordinance no. 56/2003 and whose decision can be appealed against to a court. The law provides that sentences should be executed in conditions compatible with respect for human dignity. One or more judges are delegated by the local court of appeal to supervise the observance of the rights guaranteed by the law and he (they) examine(s) the complaints of detainees.
COMPLAINT
Relying on Article 3 of the Convention the applicant complains that he was subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment on account of the material conditions of detention in the Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest.
QUESTION TO THE PARTIES
Was the applicant subjected to inhuman and degrading treatment, in breach of Article 3 of the Convention, on account of the material conditions of detention in the Iaşi Police Department’s Arrest?
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy