CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 17 juin 2015

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .sFE10DC93 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .sA6BC7FA7 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:right } .s9793A85B { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s8229ABDD { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } .sD3B63DAD { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s32563E28 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt } .sCB9E0544 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:left } .s76CF415B { page-break-before:always; clear:both } .s68C46B95 { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center } .s2D57E2E { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-decoration:underline; text-transform:uppercase } .s4ACA9207 { page-break-before:always; clear:both; mso-break-type:section-break } .s3F59B822 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; text-transform:uppercase } .s6DB91820 { text-align:center } .s25B97BCD { margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto; border:0.75pt solid #808080; border-collapse:collapse } .sF5C9E8B1 { height:46.3pt } .sD1CDDC62 { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .sDF237D91 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:center; font-size:8pt } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .s2490CDBC { border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s5FFF0A7E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; font-size:8pt } .sB217F55D { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .s26ADB50A { border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top; background-color:#e0e0e0 } .s2EDF6575 { height:39.85pt } .s2F4AF114 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s6B505E72 { margin:0pt; padding-left:0pt } .s6CF83D49 { margin-left:11.67pt; padding-left:6.18pt; font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt; font-weight:bold } .s898DAE93 { border:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sB217F55E { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:justify; font-size:9pt } .sB853CD26 { font-family:Arial; font-size:8pt } .sA0B2759 { margin-top:0pt; margin-left:0.45pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:-0.45pt; text-align:justify; font-size:8pt } .sB71F2881 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; border-bottom:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .sFD306575 { height:35.55pt } .sC7E4500 { height:36.2pt } .sBCA334AF { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s7CB6920E { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-right:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top } .s62945D10 { border-top:0.75pt solid #808080; border-left:0.75pt solid #808080; padding-right:5.03pt; padding-left:5.03pt; vertical-align:top }   Communicated on 17 June 2015     THIRD SECTION Application no. 39413/12 Sergiu FLOCEA against the Republic of Moldova and 4 other applications (see list appended) The list of the applicants is in the appended table. They are all Moldovan nationals. The second applicant is represented before the Court by Mr   R.   Zadoinov and the fifth applicant by Mr A. Postica, lawyers practising in Chisinau. The facts of the cases, as submitted by the applicants, may be summarised as follows. The applicants were convicted to different terms of imprisonment and are serving their sentences in different prisons (see the appended table). According to the applicants, they have been held in inhuman and degrading conditions of detention. They complain inter alia about poor material conditions of detention, bad sanitary conditions, overcrowding, food of insufficient quality and quantity and lack of medical assistance (see the below table for the complaints raised by each applicant). COMPLAINTS The applicants complain under Article 3 of the Convention that they have been held in inhuman and degrading conditions of detention. In applications no. 40614/14 and 71243/14, the applicants further complain that they were not provided with adequate medical care. The applicants also complain that they did not have, as required by Article   13 of the Convention, any effective remedies at their disposal for their complaints under Article 3. COMMON QUESTIONS 1.     Has there been a violation of Article 3 of the Convention? In particular, were the applicants held in inhuman and degrading conditions of detention? 2.     Did the applicants have at their disposal an effective domestic remedy for their complaints under Article 3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention? CASE SPECIFIC QUESTION In applications no. 40614/14 and 71243/14, were the applicants suffering from any serious health problems during detention? If so, did the applicants receive adequate medical care in respect of such health problems, as required by Article 3 of the Convention? APPENDIX No. Application no. Lodged on Applicant name Date of birth Represented by Type of detention Domestic decision Places of detention Complaints under Article 3 regarding poor conditions of detention Other complaints   39413/12 * 04/06/2012 Sergiu FLOCEA 28/10/1981   Final conviction to seven and a half years’ imprisonment, by the Ungheni District Court’s sentence on 13/12/2010   Soroca Prison no. 6 Poor material conditions of detention, cell with no ventilation system and infested with vermin, bad sanitary conditions, damp walls, food of insufficient quality and quantity, overcrowding, only two walking hours a day, inmates diagnosed with psychiatric illnesses held in the same cell. Article 13   40614/14 12/05/2014 Valentin BASTOVOI 23/10/1987 Represented by Mr. Roman ZADOINOV   Convicted to eight years’ imprisonment by the Buiucani District Court on 23/12/2013 Chisinau Prison no. 13 Poor material conditions of detention, overcrowding and lack of medical assistance (alleged refusal to provide the applicant with necessary medicines as required by his condition). The applicant suffers from mycosis, gastritis and respiratory infection.   Article 13   53966/14 * 01/10/2014 Oleg BOJENIN 13/02/1980   Final conviction to life imprisonment, by the Chisinau Court of Appeal on 11/07/2002   Rezina Prison no. 17 Poor material conditions of detention, food of insufficient quality and quantity, lack of ventilation system and smoking inmates in the cell, no access to library, and failure of the prison administration to provide him with clothes and shoes. Article 13   68561/14 * 09/10/2014 Ion ZESTREA 10/01/1974   Final conviction to four years and eight months’ imprisonment on 4/07/2011   Balti Prison no. 11 Poor material conditions of detention, overcrowding, bad sanitary conditions, lack of ventilation system and smoking inmates in the cell, a twenty days hunger strike. Article 13   71243/14 24/10/2014 Mihail CUIBAN 25/07/1956 Represented by Mr. Alexandru POSTICA   Convicted by the Botanica Court on 24/12/2012 Chisinau Prison no. 13 Cricova Prison no. 4 Poor material conditions of detention, overcrowding and lack of medical assistance (alleged refusal to provide the applicant with necessary medicines as required by his condition). The applicant suffers from Hepatitis B and D. Article 13