FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 26985/16
Nicolae-Florin NIMIGAN against Romania
and 4 other applications
(see appended table)
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 15 June 2023 as a Committee composed of:
Tim Eicke, President,
Branko Lubarda,
Ana Maria Guerra Martins, judges,
and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above applications lodged on the various dates indicated in the appended table,
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 list of applicants is set out in the appended table.
The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).
THE LAW
Joinder of the applicationsHaving regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.
Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention)The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.
The Government argued mainly that the applicants had lost their victim status because they had benefitted from the remedy offered by Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences. They asked the Court to reject the present applications for being incompatible ratione personae with the provisions of the Convention.
The applicants disagreed, claiming that the compensation awarded to them was insufficient.
The Court notes that in the decision Dîrjan and Ştefan v. Romania ((dec.), nos. 14224/15 and 50977/15, 15 April 2020) it has examined similar applications as the ones in the present case and declared them inadmissible because the applicants had lost their victim status. The Court noted that Law no. 169/2017 amending and completing Law no. 254/2013 on the execution of sentences, adopted following the pilot judgment in the case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania (nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017) and in force between October 2017 and December 2019, was an effective remedy in respect of inadequate conditions of detention in Romanian prisons. More specifically, the above law set forth a compensatory remedy, available for periods of detention ranging from 2012 to 2019 and allowing the deduction of six days for 30 days spent in conditions of detention that fell short of standards compatible with Article 3 of the Convention (see Dîrjan and Ştefan, cited above, §28). That benefit had an impact on the term of the prison sentences, giving detainees an opportunity of earlier release on parole.
Turning to the circumstances of the present applications, the Court has not found any fact or argument capable of persuading it to reach a different conclusion on the admissibility of those complaints. The above-mentioned remedy was available to the applicants in the present applications and, indeed, they benefitted from it. Thus, on different dates, the domestic authorities, applying the provisions laid down in the abovementioned decision Dîrjan and Ştefan, awarded compensation, through the reduction of days, to the applicants for the entire period of detention spent in inadequate conditions of which they complained (for further details see the appended table). Furthermore, the applicants were released from prison or were transferred to detention facilities they are not complaining about.
The Court is therefore satisfied that the applicants have been afforded adequate redress and can no longer claim to be victims of a violation of their rights under Article 3 of the Convention, insofar as the conditions of their detention, described in the appended table, are concerned.
In view of the above, the Court finds that 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.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Decides to join the applications;
Declares the applications inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 6 July 2023.
Viktoriya Maradudina Tim Eicke
Acting 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
Domestic compensation awarded (in days) based on total period calculated by national authorities
26985/16
30/05/2016
Nicolae-Florin NIMIGAN
1992
Aiud Prison
18/06/2015 to
29/01/2018
2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 12 day(s)
234 days in compensation for a total period of 1,197 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions between 21/08/2012 – 22/12/2019
37995/16
05/09/2016
Viorel TELEOACĂ
1965
Rahova and Jilava Prisons
10/12/2015 to
03/05/2018
2 year(s) and 4 month(s) and 24 day(s)
192 days in compensation for a total period of 962 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions between 10/12/2015 – 03/05/2018
46473/16
29/08/2016
Marian GRIGORAŞ
1970
Galați Prison
15/12/2012 to
29/08/2016
3 year(s) and 8 month(s) and 15 day(s)
540 days in compensation for a total period of 3,143 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions between 24/07/2012 – 22/12/2019
31106/17
13/04/2017
Petrică-Virgiliu ZAMFIR
1968
Constanța Vișan
Galați
Tulcea and Rahova Prisons
31/03/2015 to
15/11/2017
2 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 16 day(s)
192 days in compensation for a total period of 961 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions between 31/03/2015 – 15/11/2017
37080/17
27/10/2017
Nicolae PEANCI
1968
Slobozia and Poarta Albă Prisons
08/11/2016 to
15/06/2018
1 year(s) and 7 month(s) and 8 day(s)
114 days in compensation for a total period of 585 days spent in detention in inadequate conditions between 08/11/2016 – 15/06/2018