5.  The applicant is an Algerian national who was born in 1960 and was, at the time of the introduction of the application being detained in Safi Military Barracks, Safi. 6.  The facts of the case, as submitted by the parties, may be summarised as follows. 7.  The applicant arrived in Malta on 24 June 2006 without documents, having travelled by boat from Libya in an irregular manner. Upon his arrival he was served with a removal order in accordance with Article 14 of the Immigration Act (“the Act”). The reason for his detention was given as being that under Article 5 of the Act, he was in Malta without leave. He was consequently detained at the police headquarters. 8.  On 26 June the applicant was questioned by the police and he gave a statement. On 28 June 2006 he was arraigned in court charged with aiding, assisting, counselling or procuring other persons to enter or to attempt to enter Malta or having conspired to that effect. He was remanded in custody. 9.  On 1 October 2006, pending proceedings, the applicant made a late preliminary application for refugee status, which was considered by the Refugee Commissioner as expressing his desire for recognition of refugee status. 10.  On 25 October 2006 the Court of Magistrates found the applicant guilty and sentenced him to eighteen months' imprisonment. 11.  While in prison, on 17 April 2007, the applicant made a formal application for asylum and was interviewed on the same day. 12.  After serving his sentence, the applicant was released from prison on 27 June 2007 and was placed in a detention centre pending the determination of his asylum claim. 13.  The applicant's asylum application was rejected on 24 April 2007 and subsequently on appeal on 18 July 2007 as he had failed to provide convincing evidence that he would face a real risk or had a well-founded fear of persecution. 14.  The applicant remained in detention awaiting removal under the Government's immigration policy until 6 January 2009 when his removal order was lifted in view of the lack of prospects of his eventual deportation. The applicant claimed that the conditions of detention in Blocks C and B had been inappropriate. Both facilities had been overcrowded, particularly in the summer months, with inadequate sanitary and other facilities, limited medical care, no possibility of constructive activities and limited recreational opportunities. The applicant made reference to reports of the CPT, the Council of Europe Human Rights Commissioner and the LIBE Committee of the European Parliament documenting such conditions.