CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 6 mars 2012

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s523616E0 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; font-size:14pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s662121A1 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s87F05BA2 { margin-top:12pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sC7EAD8B { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .sA1D3DA2E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } THIRD SECTION Application no. 47754/10 Laurenţiu Viorel URSA and Others against Romania lodged on 26 July 2010   QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES   1.     Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention on account of the material conditions of the applicants’ detention in Bistriţa Prison from 17 March 2010 (the first and second applicants) and 6 April 2010 (the third applicant) to 22 March 2011 (the first applicant) and 26 October 2010 (the second and third applicants)?   2.     The Government are invited to provide information and supporting documents on the material conditions of the applicants’ detention: size of the cells in which they were detained, number of inmates in the respective cells throughout the entire period of detention, bedding in the cells, sanitary facilities, access to showers and hygiene, and lighting of the cells as well as the record of any complaint made by the applicants concerning the conditions of detention, and in particular concerning the allegations that the third applicant was kept with smokers in the cell despite being a non ‑ smoker.   3.     Has there been a breach of the applicants’ right to vote under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 on account of the ban on voting imposed on them by the final decision delivered by the High Court of Cassation and Justice on 5   March 2010?