EIT: Romaniassa rakenteellinen ongelma vankiloiden kunnon osalta

26.4.2017 | Oikeusuutiset

Markku Fredman

Euroopan ihmisoikeustuomioistuin (EIT) on eilisessä tuomiossaan todennut, että vankeusolot Romaniassa loukkasivat EIS 3 artiklaa. EIT katsoi myös, että tuomiosta ilmenevät ongelmat osoittivat Romanian vankeusoloissa rakenteellisen ongelman, ja velvoitti hallituksen esittämään 6 kuukauden kuluessa täsmällisen aikataulun toimenpiteille, joilla vähennetään ylikansoitusta vankiloissa ja parannetaan olosuhteita vankiloissa ylipäätään, sekä säätämään oikeussuojakeinot loukkausten välttämiseksi ja hyvittämiseksi.

Lisäksi EIT päätti, että muiden vastaavien, Romaniaa vastaan vireillä olevien mutta vielä hallitukselle kommentoitavaksi lähettämättömien valitusten käsittely keskeytetään toistaiseksi. Romanian hallitukselle jo kommunikoitujen valitusten käsittelyä sen sijaan jatketaan.

EIT:n lehdistötiedotteesta:

In [a] Chamber judgment in the case of Rezmiveș and Others v. Romania (applications nos. 61467/12, 39516/13, 48213/13 and 68191/13) the European Court of Human Rights held, unanimously, that there had been:

a violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case concerned the conditions of detention in Romanian prisons and in detention facilities attached to police stations.

The applicants complained, among other things, of overcrowding in their cells, inadequate sanitary facilities, lack of hygiene, poor-quality food, dilapidated equipment and the presence of rats and insects in the cells.

Under Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment), the Court held in particular that the conditions of the applicants’ detention, also taking into account the length of their incarceration, had subjected them to hardship going beyond the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention.

Under Article 46 (binding force and execution of judgments), the Court decided to apply the pilotjudgment procedure, finding that the applicants’ situation was part of a general problem originating in a structural dysfunction specific to the Romanian prison system.

The Court held that the State should introduce: (1) measures to reduce overcrowding and improve the material conditions of detention; and (2) remedies (a preventive remedy and a specific compensatory remedy).

The Court decided to adjourn the examination of similar applications that had not yet been communicated to the Romanian Government and to continue its examination of applications that had already been communicated. Within six months from the date on which the judgment became final, the Romanian Government had to provide, in cooperation with the Committee of Ministers, a precise timetable for the implementation of the general measures.