CEDH · CASELAW;COMMUNICATEDCASES;ENG — 29 août 2023

.s800EAC49 { font-size:12pt } .s379BC09C { margin-top:36pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-align:right } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial } .s10950C61 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; text-indent:14.2pt; text-align:justify } .s5E1364CA { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:12pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid; font-size:14pt } .s339D85E6 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s665E407E { margin-top:66pt; margin-bottom:14pt; text-align:center; page-break-inside:avoid; page-break-after:avoid } .s29100277 { font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold } .sA36B60A1 { font-family:Arial; font-style:italic } Published on 18 September 2023   THIRD SECTION Application no. 22144/23 Erion TENEQEXHI against Greece lodged on 24 May 2023 communicated on 29 August 2023 SUBJECT MATTER OF THE CASE The application concerns the conditions of detention in police stations, as well as the issue of the new domestic legal remedy in respect of conditions of detention in Greece introduced by virtue of law no. 4985/2022, as added to article 6A of law no. 2776/1999 (Penitentiary code). The applicant, an Albanian national, was arrested and administratively detained on 8 January 2023 for illegal entry and stay in Greek territory until his removal procedure is completed. On 11 January 2023 a decision was issued to remove the applicant, which further ordered the continuation of his detention. The applicant claims that as of 8 January 2023 he was detained for two weeks at the Migration Management Department of Agios Athanasios. He alleges that he was then transferred to the Transfers Department of Thessaloniki ( Τμήμα Μεταγωγών ). Without indicating the exact day of the transfers, the applicant alleged that he remained in the two police stations for a total of 59 days. On 23 February 2023 the applicant lodged objections against his conditions of detention, which were rejected by the First Instance Administrative Court of Thessaloniki on 24 February 2023. The applicant complains under Article 3 of the Convention about the conditions of his detention at the police stations of the Migration Management Department of Agios Athanasios and the Transfers Department of Thessaloniki. He claims that he remained in police stations for 59 days in conditions unsuitable for detention exceeding the period of a few days, particularly in view of the complete lack of possibilities for outdoor time and physical exercise, which caused him feelings of isolation from the outside world with adverse effects on his mental health and morale. QUESTIONS TO THE PARTIES 1.     Did the material conditions of the applicant’s detention after 8 January 2023 in police stations of the Migration Management Department of Agios Athanasios and the Transfers Department of Thessaloniki amount to inhuman or degrading treatment within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention ( see Tousios v.   Greece , no. 36296/19, §§ 22-27, 10 February 2022, and compare with Iatropoulos and others v. Greece [Committee], no.   23262/13, §§ 35-41, 20   April 2017)? Could the conditions of the applicant’s detention at the Migration Management Department of Agios Athanasios and the Transfers Department of Thessaloniki be considered as a continuous situation within the meaning of Article 3 of the Convention ( Ananyev and Others v.   Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 75-78, 10 January 2012)? The parties are asked to specify the dates and places of the applicant’s detention after 8 January 2023, indicating the dates of transfers, and to submit copies of the relevant documents.   2.     Does the applicant have at his disposal an effective domestic remedy in respect of his complaint regarding the conditions of detention under Article   3, as required by Article 13 of the Convention? In particular, could the domestic legal remedy provided by virtue of law no. 4985/2022, as added to article 6A of law no. 2776/1999, be considered effective within the meaning of Article   13 of the Convention in respect of the applicant’s complaints about the conditions of detention at police stations? More specifically, could this remedy be considered as an effective preventive and/or compensatory remedy within the meaning of Article   13 of the Convention ( see J.M.B. and Others v.   France , nos. 9671/15 and 31 others, § 208, 30 January 2020; Ulemek v.   Croatia , no. 21613/16, §§   71-74, 31   October 2019; and Ananyev and   Others v. Russia , nos. 42525/07 and 60800/08, §§ 93-99, 210-231, 10   January 2012)? The Government are requested to provide examples of the relevant domestic case-law in application of the legal remedy provided by virtue of Law no. 4985/2022, as added to article 6A of Law no. 2776/1999, and in particular as regards the conditions of administrative detention at police stations.