CASE OF MANGU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA

 
 
 
FOURTH SECTION
 
 
 
 
 
 
CASE OF MANGU AND OTHERS v. ROMANIA
(Application no. 33079/16 and 9 other applications -
see appended list)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
JUDGMENT
 
 
STRASBOURG
 
6 June 2019
 
 
 
This judgment is final but it may be subject to editorial revision.

In the case of Mangu and Others v. Romania,
The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting as a Committee composed of:
Georges Ravarani, President,
Marko Bošnjak,
Péter Paczolay, judges,
and Liv Tigerstedt Acting Deputy Section Registrar,
Having deliberated in private on 16 May 2019,
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.  Notice of the applications was given to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).
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. In application no. 33079/16, the applicant also raised another complaint under Article 3 of the Convention.
THE LAW
I.  JOINDER OF THE APPLICATIONS
5.  Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single judgment.
II.  ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF THE CONVENTION
6.  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. 36722/16 and 36739/16, the Government raised a preliminary objection of non-compliance with the six-month time-limit, claiming that the applicants’ complaints regarding their initial detention period had been lodged out of time.
8. The Court observes that in application no. 36722/16 the applicant’s complaint regarding his initial detention in Miercurea Ciuc Prison, which ceased on 2 July 2015 by his transfer to another prison facility in respect of which he did not raise any complaint, was lodged with the Court on 22 July 2016, that is, more than six months after the transfer.
9. Moreover, the Court notes that in application no. 36739/16 the applicant’s complaint regarding his initial detention period in Jilava Prison, which ceased on 26 January 2005 by his transfer to other prison facilities in respect of which he did not raise any complaint, was lodged with the Court on 20 July 2016, that is, more than six months after the transfer.
10. Therefore, the Court accepts the Government’s objection and finds that these parts of applications nos. 36722/16 and 36739/16 were lodged outside the six-month time-limit and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.
11.  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 ‑141, and Ananyev and Others v. Russia, nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 149‑159, 10 January 2012).
12.  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.
13.  Having examined all the material submitted to it, as well as the Government’s objection concerning the continuous situation of the applicants’ conditions of detention in some of the cases, 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, the Court considers that in the instant case the applicants’ conditions of detention were inadequate.
14.  These complaints are therefore admissible and disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention.
III.  REMAINING COMPLAINTS
15.  In application no. 33079/16, the applicant also raised another complaint under Article 3 of the Convention.
16.  The Court has examined this application and considers that, in the light of all the material in its possession and in so far as the matter complained of is within its competence, this complaint either does not meet the admissibility criteria set out in Articles 34 and 35 of the Convention or does not disclose any appearance of a violation of the rights and freedoms enshrined in the Convention or the Protocols thereto.
It follows that this part of the application must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4 of the Convention.
IV.  APPLICATION OF ARTICLE 41 OF THE CONVENTION
17.  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 v. Romania, nos. 61467/12 and 3 others, 25 April 2017), the Court considers it reasonable to award the sums indicated in the appended table.
19.  The Court 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,
1.  Decides to join the applications;
 
2.  Declares the complaints concerning the inadequate conditions of detention, as set out in the appended table, admissible and the remainder of the applications nos. 33079/16, 36722/16 and 36739/16 inadmissible;
 
3.  Holds that these complaints disclose a breach of Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention;
 
4.  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 6 June 2019, pursuant to Rule 77 §§ 2 and 3 of the Rules of Court.
Liv TigerstedtGeorges Ravarani
Acting Deputy RegistrarPresident

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
Date of birth
 
Facility
Start and end date
Duration
Sq. m. per inmate
Specific grievances
Amount awarded for pecuniary and non-pecuniary damage and costs and expenses per applicant
(in euros)[1]   
33079/16
05/07/2016
Florin Mangu
09/04/1979
Poarta Albă and Slobozia Prisons
22/12/2015 to
10/07/2017
1 year, 6 months and 19 days
 
lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, mouldy or dirty cell, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient physical exercise in fresh air (Slobozia Prison)
3,000   
33704/16
14/07/2016
Ionel Marin-Ioniţă
12/07/1974
Bucharest Police Arrest no. 22, Rahova, Giurgiu and Jilava Prisons
04/03/2014 to
19/09/2016
2 years, 6 months and 16 days
1.4 - 2.9 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods between 04/03-08/04/2014, 16-22/05/2014, 30/07/2014-19/01/2015 and 18/03-07/04/2016), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, mouldy or dirty cell, bunk beds, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities (save for Giurgiu Prison)
3,000   
34648/16
06/07/2016
Doinel-Simion Crăciun
20/09/1974
Jilava, Mărgineni and Ploiești Prisons
26/10/2006
pending
More than 12 years, 5 months and 15 days
1.4 - 2.5 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods between 29/01-10/02/2008 and 11-26/03/2014), lack of or inadequate furniture, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food
5,000   
35174/16
06/07/2016
Claudiu Bălănoiu
15/06/1975
Gorj Police Arrest, Craiova Prison
13/05/2011 to
28/03/2018
6 years, 10 months and 16 days
0.9 - 2 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods 13-17/05/2011 and 11-14/06/2011), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate furniture, bunk beds, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities
 
5,000   
36055/16
03/08/2016
Eugen Staviri
06/12/1959
Bacău Police Arrest, Bacău, Rahova, Iași, Tulcea, Vaslui, Chilia Veche Prisons
11/07/2009 to
12/04/2018
8 years, 9 months and 2 days
1.1 - 2.9 m²
overcrowding (save for the period between 11/07-13/10/2009), lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate furniture, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, mouldy or dirty cell
 
5,000   
36091/16
14/07/2016
Petrișor Doica
01/07/1991
Olt Police Arrest, Jilava Prison Hospital, Craiova, Rahova, Târgu Jiu, Drobeta Turnu Severin Prisons
15/04/2010 to
13/01/2017
6 years, 8 months and 30 days
1.2 - 2,2 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods between 15/04-02/06/2010, , 02/05-26/09/2011, 29/09-21/11/2011, 24/11/2011-17/02/2012, 25-28/03/2012 and 19/07-06/08/2012,), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or insufficient natural light, lack of or inadequate furniture, lack of fresh air, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of privacy for toilet, bunk beds (Craiova and Drobeta Turnu Severin Prisons), passive smoking (Rahova Prison)
 
 
 
5,000   
36722/16
22/07/2016
Boby Bureaţă
21/07/1987
Codlea and Miercurea Ciuc Prisons
18/04/2016 to
23/02/2017
10 months and 6 days
1.2 - 1.7 m²
overcrowding, bunk beds, inadequate temperature, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents
1,000   
36739/16
20/07/2016
Petre Simion
09/03/1956
 
Represented by
Irina Maria Peter
Bucharest
Jilava, Rahova and Giurgiu Prisons
25/08/2005 to
23/08/2017
11 years, 11 months and 30 days
1.9 - 2.7 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods between 19/11/2007-21/01/2009 and 19/02/2012-20/12/2016), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, poor quality of food, lack of or inadequate furniture, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, inadequate temperature
5,000   
37144/16
20/07/2016
Ioan Zoltan
14/05/1976
Aiud and Bârcea Mare Prisons
30/06/2015 to
27/03/2017
1 year, 8 months and 28 days
 
 
 
 
 
 
Bârcea Mare Prison
01/10/2018
pending
More than 6 months and 10 days
1.8 - 2.8 m²
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1.8 - 2.6 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods between 06-27/10/2015 and 16-21/12/2015), lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate furniture, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light
overcrowding, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, poor quality of food, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate furniture, lack of fresh air, inadequate temperature, lack of or insufficient natural light
3,000 
45148/16
26/07/2016
Florin Munteanu
27/08/1985
 
Represented by
Ionela Mărgărit
Bucharest
Galați Police Arrest, Galați, Rahova and Brăila Prisons
14/02/2013 to
08/08/2017
4 years, 5 months and 26 days
1,2 - 2,4 m²
overcrowding (save for the periods between 18/11/2015-07/01/2016 and 29/01/2016-16/02/2017), poor quality of food, poor quality of potable water, lack of or poor quality of bedding and bed linen, bunk beds (save for Brăila Prison), lack of or restricted access to leisure or educational activities, infestation of cell with insects/rodents, lack of or inadequate hygienic facilities, lack of fresh air, lack of or inadequate furniture, mouldy or dirty cell, no or restricted access to warm water
3,000
 
[1].  Plus any tax that may be chargeable to the applicants.

Full & Egal Universal Law Academy