I correctly predicted that there was a violation of human rights in PLETOSU HALUNGESCU v. ROMANIA.

Information

  • Judgment date: 2016-04-07
  • Communication date: 2014-08-26
  • Application number(s): 38238/13
  • Country:   ROU
  • Relevant ECHR article(s): 3
  • Conclusion:
    Violation of Article 6 - Right to a fair trial (Article 6 - Administrative proceedings
    Article 6-1 - Reasonable time)
    Violation of Article 13 - Right to an effective remedy (Article 13 - Effective remedy)
  • Result: Violation
    • SEE FINAL JUDGMENT

JURI Prediction

  • Probability: 0.953296
  • Prediction: Violation

  • Consistent


Legend

 In line with the court's judgment
 In opposition to the court's judgment
Darker color: higher probability
: In line with the court's judgment  
: In opposition to the court's judgment

Communication text used for prediction

The applicant, Mr Valentin Pletosu Halungescu, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1968 and is currently detained in Iaşi Prison.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 4 May 2010 the applicant was placed in pre-trial detention in Bacău Prison.
In March 2011 he was transferred to Iaşi Prison where he is currently serving a sentence of eleven years imprisonment for rape.
He is very often transferred to Bacău Prison in order to appear before the courts for various reasons.
The applicant alleges that the conditions of detention in Bacău Prison, both during his pre-trial detention and currently during his repeated transfers, were inhuman.
More specifically, he was held in solitary confinement, in very small damp cells, without glass in the windows, without heating in the winter and with inadequate sanitary installations and used matrasses.
The applicant further alleges that in Iaşi Prison there is severe overcrowding, poor hygiene and presence of bugs and very poor quality of food.
He also alleges that the cells have no ventilation and in the summer it is extremely hot.
Lastly, according to a medical certificate drafted in March 2011 at the Rahova Prison Hospital in Bucharest, the applicant was suffering from gastritis and lumbar discopathy.
He was recommended diet, medicine for his digestive problems and against the pain, to abstain from effort and to avoid the cold and humidity.
In this respect the applicant submits that the medical treatment available to prisoners in both Bacău and Iaşi Prisons was of very poor quality, with the absence of an in-house dentist and lengthy gaps in the supply of necessary medicine, such as the usual medicine for his digestive problems.
COMPLAINT The applicant complains in substance under Article 3 of the Convention about the inhuman conditions of detention in Bacău and Iaşi Prisons.
More specifically, he complains that he was held in solitary confinement, in very small and damp cells, without glass in the windows, without heating in the winter and with inadequate sanitary installations and used matrasses in Bacău Prison.
He also complains of overcrowding, poor hygiene and food, presence of bugs and no ventilation in the cells in Iaşi Prison.
Lastly, the applicant complains about the poor quality medical treatment available to prisoners in both Bacău and Iaşi Prisons.

Judgment