FOURTH SECTION
DECISION
Application no. 9728/15
Marian STANCIUC
against Romania
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 24 May 2018 as a Committee composed of:
Vincent A. De Gaetano, President,
Georges Ravarani,
Marko Bošnjak, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having regard to the above application lodged on 6 May 2015,
Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government,
Having deliberated, decides as follows:
FACTS AND PROCEDURE
The applicant, Mr Marian Stanciuc, is a Romanian national who was born in 1970 and lives in Văleni. The Romanian Government (“the Government”) were represented by their Agent, Ms C. Brumar of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
The applicant’s complaint under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention in Iași Penitentiary from 22 October 2012 to 4 November 2014 was communicated to the Government.
THE LAW
The applicant complained of inadequate conditions of detention in Iași Penitentiary.
The Government indicated that the applicant was detained in Iași Penitentiary from 23 October 2012 to 5 November 2014.
The applicant did not comment on the Government’s above allegations.
Taking into account all the material before it, the Court must first determine whether the applicant complied with the six-month time-limit established by Article 35 §1 of the Convention. The Court has already considered that the six-month rule is a public policy rule and that, consequently, it has jurisdiction to apply of its own motion, even if the Government have not raised that objection (Sabri Güneş v. Turkey, [GC], no. 27396/06, § 29, 29 June 2012).
The Court notes that the applicant was detained in Iași Penitentiary from 23 October 2012 until 5 November 2014. The time-limit laid down by Article 35 § 1 of the Convention therefore started to run on the following day, 6 November 2014, and expired at midnight on 5 May 2015 (Sabri Güneş v. Turkey, cited above, § 60). It is to be noted that the complaint was lodged with the Court on 6 May 2015, that is, after the expiry of the above-mentioned time-limit.
Accordingly, this complaint has been introduced out of time and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.
For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,
Declares the application inadmissible.
Done in English and notified in writing on 14 June 2018.
Liv TigerstedtVincent A. De Gaetano
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy