5.  The applicant was born in 1962. 6.  On 21 February 2002, the Bucharest County Court convicted the applicant of drug trafficking and sentenced him to thirteen years’ imprisonment. The judgment was upheld by the Supreme Court of Justice, which dismissed an appeal by the applicant on 15 May 2003. 7.  The applicant started serving his sentence in Rahova Prison. On 2  December 2008 he was transferred to Jilava Prison. He remained in prison until his release on probation on 6 July 2010. 8.  The circumstances of the applicant’s transfer from Rahova Prison to Jilava Prison are in dispute between the parties.
(a)  The applicant’s account 9.  On 2 December 2008, the applicant, with seventy other detainees, was transferred from Rahova Prison to Jilava Prison. The applicant was informed about his transfer only that morning and he was allowed only ten minutes to take some personal belongings. 10.  The detainees were kept in the reception area of Rahova Prison from 8.30 a.m. until 3.30 p.m. without water or food. The transfer to Jilava Prison took until 9.30 p.m. There they were again kept in the reception area of the prison without water or food until 3.30 p.m. the next day, when they were sent to their new cells. The applicant stated that they were kept without water or food for a day and a half. 11.  Because he was transferred under these conditions, the applicant could not take with him his clothes, personal papers, books and other objects for personal use, among which were his Koran and prayer mat. The money from his account was transferred from Rahova Prison to Jilava Prison only six weeks later, leaving the applicant without the means to buy water, toiletries or telephone cards.
(b)  The Government’s account 12.  The applicant was transferred from Rahova Prison to Jilava Prison with sixty‑one other inmates on 2 December 2008. They were kept in the reception area of Rahova Prison between 10.35 a.m. and 4.45 p.m. 13.  The Government alleged that the reception area of Rahova Prison had toilets where the applicant could also get drinking water. They also submitted that the detainees had received food while waiting to be transferred. 14.  The luggage of all the transferred detainees was subjected to inventory and sealed. 15.  The applicant’s money was sent on 5 December 2008 and received at Jilava Prison on 10 December 2008. 16.  The applicant and the Government disagreed as to most aspects of the conditions of detention.
(a)  The applicant’s account 17.  The applicant alleged that the cells occupied by him were overcrowded. There were four tiers of bunk beds, the bottom level being used for the detainees’ personal possessions. However, the applicant did not indicate the number of detainees in the cell. 18.  The applicant also complained of unsatisfactory sanitary conditions and poor quality of food. He claimed that the temperature in the cells in winter was too low. He also alleged that there were rats and parasites in the cells. The toilet fittings were defective. The prison had no designated eating area, and the detainees were forced to eat in their cells, where there was no furniture other than the beds. The water seemed to be infested with worms and had a strange colour and taste. Also, the detainees did not have water between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. The smell in the cells was appalling, and difficult to bear in summer due to the lack of hygiene.
(b)  The Government 19.  The applicant was detained in Jilava Prison between 2 December 2008 and 6 July 2010. 20.  Between 2 and 8 December 2008 the applicant was detained in cell no. 509, measuring 42.39 sq. m, which he shared with twenty other inmates. 21.  Between 8 December 2008 and 28 January 2010 the applicant was detained in cell no. 113, measuring 24.86 sq. m, which he shared with seven or eight other inmates. 22.  Between 28 January and 6 July 2010 the applicant was detained in cell no. 111, measuring 24.86 sq. m. The cell was occupied by between four and eight detainees. 23.  As regards cleanliness and hygiene, the Government submitted that every year the prison authorities signed contracts for rodent and pest control with companies specialising in this work. Disinfection of the cells was carried out at least once every three months. Moreover, the quality of the drinking water was tested regularly by the prison authorities, with the aid of a specialised laboratory. Furthermore, the food was fresh and of good quality. 24.  Since 2008 significant rehabilitation work had been carried out by the prison authorities. The heating system, the sewerage and the water supply systems had been repaired. Some sections of the prison and detention rooms had also been modernised.