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

Information

  • Judgment date: 2019-03-19
  • Communication date: 2015-04-22
  • Application number(s): 47826/14
  • Country:   ROU
  • Relevant ECHR article(s): 3
  • Conclusion:
    Violation of Article 3 - Prohibition of torture (Substantive aspect)
  • Result: Violation
    • SEE FINAL JUDGMENT

JURI Prediction

  • Probability: 0.686289
  • 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 Cătălin Zamfir, is a Romanian national, who was born in 1978 and is currently detained in Giurgiu Prison.
The facts of the case, as submitted by the applicant, may be summarised as follows.
On 20 January 2014, following an episode of weight loss, the applicant was hospitalised in Jilava Prison Hospital where he was diagnosed with “chronic hepatitis under observation”.
On 23 January 2014 the applicant was released from hospital with a recommendation by his doctor for a treatment with a hepatoprotective drug and vitamins.
A test for viral markers was ordered.
Because he did not receive the recommended drugs the applicant complained to the National Administration of Prisons.
On 20 March 2014 he was informed that he would be given treatment once the diagnosis of “chronic hepatitis” had been confirmed, having in mind that the viral markers were still under analysis.
The applicant complained to the post-sentencing judge about the prison authorities’ failure to provide him the recommended treatment, pursuant to the provisions of Law no.
275/2006 on the execution of sentences.
On 24 March 2014 the post-sentencing judge held that the fact that analyses were under way had no influence over the treatment recommended to the applicant when he was released from hospital.
The judge then ordered the Giurgiu prison authorities “to provide the applicant with the medical treatment in accordance with his condition and the specialist doctor’s recommendations, as set forth in the latest medical letter”.
The applicant alleges that the judgment of 24 March 2014 was not enforced by the prison authorities and he did not receive any treatment for his hepatitis from the moment it was diagnosed.
COMPLAINT The applicant complains under Articles 1 and 2 of the Convention that his life is endangered by the authorities’ failure to provide him adequate treatment for his hepatitis despite his doctor’s recommendations and the judgment of the post-sentencing judge.

Judgment