Detention conditions and the lack of effective remedy for the deatinees to express their complaints
JUDGMENT
Pilalis v. Greece and others 17.05.2018 (no. 5574/16)
SUMMARY
Protest for prison conditions. Overpopulation of prisons. Water cuts, inadequate meals and medical care. Infringement of Article 13 (right to an effective remedy). No violation of Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights.
PROVISIONS
Article 3
Article 13
PRINCIPAL FACTS
The applicants, Dimitrios Pilalis, Varlam Hartislava and Christoforos Martidis, are Greek nationals who were born in 1941, 1977 and 1973 respectively. All three were detained in Domokos Prison (Greece). The case concerned their conditions of detention.
Mr Pilalis had heart problems and was registered as 80% disabled. He was detained in Domokos Prison from 2010 to 2016, when he was released. Mr Hartislava was detained in the same prison from 2013 to 2016, when he was transferred to another prison, while Mr Martidis was detained there from 2009 until his release in 2015. According to the three applicants, they had less than 3 sq. m of personal space in their cells owing to overcrowding. They also complained of cuts in the water supply and alleged that the meals and medical treatment provided were inadequate.
In February 2015 the inmates of Domokos Prison refused to return to their cells or to eat, demanding that a doctor be assigned to the prison immediately. In a statement to the press they called for access to medical treatment. The first and second applicants addressed their complaints concerning their conditions of detention to the prosecutor supervising the prison, but received no reply.
Relying on Article 3 (prohibition of torture and inhuman or degrading treatment) and Article 13 (right to an effective remedy) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicants complained of their conditions of detention in Domokos Prison and of the lack of an effective remedy in that regard.
THE DECISION OF THE COURT
No violation of Article 3 – in respect of Mr Pilalis and Mr Hartislava
Violation of Article 13 – in respect of Mr Pilalis and Mr Hartislava Application struck out in so far as Mr Martidis was concerned
Just satisfaction: 2,000 euros (EUR) each to Mr Pilalis and Mr Hartislava for non-pecuniary damage(echrcaselaw.com editing).
