CASE OF NENCIU v. ROMANIA
Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Article 3 - Degrading treatment) (Substantive aspect);Violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 - Right to free elections-{general} (Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 - Vote)
Iulia Motoc;Marko Bošnjak;Paulo Pinto De Albuquerque
4. The applicant was born in 1966 and is currently detained in Giurgiu Prison. 5. On 24 June 1999 the Călăraşi County Court convicted the applicant of burglary, rape and murder and sentenced him to twenty five years’ imprisonment. In application of Article 71 of the Criminal Code, his right to vote and to be elected was withdrawn during detention. 6. The decision became final on 25 February 2000 when the Supreme Court of Justice dismissed the appeal on points of law lodged by the applicant. 7. The applicant is currently serving his prison sentence in Giurgiu Prison where he has been held since 21 January 2009. 8. The applicant described the conditions of his detention as follows: - there was no water during summer days; - he was placed with smokers (in the court-room and for few days during detention) although he did not smoke; - the windows were covered with bars and thick galvanised wire which rendered the ventilation of the cell impossible; - he was transported to court hearings in small dirty vans, with no ventilation or natural light; - from 2009 until the date of the last information received (22 July 2014) he had been held with five other inmates in a 17.65 sq. m cell infested with bugs. 9. Based on the documents presented by the Prison Administration, the Government explained that during his stay in Giurgiu Prison the applicant had occupied the following cells, all non-smoking: - cells nos. A305, A306, A328, B232, C109, C116, C126, C127, C215, C216, C225, E1.22, E3.7, E3.12, E3.24, E3.26, E3.32, E4.5, E4.14, E4.25, E4.27, E5.32, E10.8, E10.11 which each measured 17,65 sq. m and which he shared with a maximum of five other detainees, between 26 January 2009 and 5 August 2010, between 12 August and 6 September 2010, between 7 March and 28 April 2011, between 20 May and 22 August 2011, between 29 August 2011 and 3 February 2012, between 9 February and 2 April 2012, between 7 May and 23 July 2012, between 2 August and 13 September 2012, between 4 October 2012 and 4 March 2013, between 11 March and 11 April 2013, between 18 and 29 April 2013, between 7 May 2013 and 7 February 2014 and between 21 February and 22 July 2014. - cells nos. C317, C333, C336 and E3.19 which each measured 9.66 sq. m and which he shared with another person, between 21 and 26 January 2009, between 6 September and 10 October 2010, between 12 and 20 May 2011 and between 7 and 21 February 2014. 10. The sanitary annexe measured 2.7 sq. m and was provided with a sink, a shower cabin, shelves, mirror and a toilet. All rooms had windows and ventilation. The detainees collected the trash and cleaned the cells twice every day. 11. The inmates received the hygiene products from the prison administration and had access to warm water twice every week. Access to drinking water was unlimited. 12. The information submitted by the Prison Administration concerned conditions of detention only until 22 July 2014. 13. According to the Government, from 21 February 2014 onwards the applicant had been sharing the cells with a maximum of four other persons, in compliance with the decision adopted on 31 January 2014 by the Giurgiu District Court (see paragraph 15 below). 14. The applicant complained repeatedly to the post-sentencing judge (Law no. 275/2006 on the execution of sentences; hereinafter “Law no. 275/2006”) about the conditions of his detention. 15. By two decisions of 29 August and 21 November 2013 the post-sentencing judge for Giurgiu Prison noted that the applicant was no longer held with smokers. The judge also considered that because of the large number of inmates held in that Prison, it was impossible to ensure more personal space for the applicant. He also concluded that in so far as the inmates were responsible for cleaning their cells, the presence of bugs was not the authorities’ fault, but that of the prisoners. The applicant appealed against these two decisions. On 31 January 2014 the Giurgiu District Court ordered the Giurgiu Prison administration to ensure the applicant 4 sq. m of personal space, as provided by law. 16. The applicant also complained before the post-sentencing judge for Slobozia Prison, that while he was held in there, from March to May 2013, he was again placed in cells with smokers. On 7 October 2013 the postsentencing judge dismissed the request as having been lodged after the expiry of the ten-day time-limit provided for by Law no. 275/2006. The decision was upheld by the Slobozia District Court on 10 March 2014. 17. Ruling on a similar complaint lodged by the applicant about his stay in a cell with smokers from 8 to 11 March 2013 in Rahova Prison, the postsentencing judge for this prison decided, on 19 March 2013, that no measure could be imposed on Rahova Prison as the applicant was no longer there. He also noted that the applicant could bring a separate claim for compensation before the civil courts.