Постановление Европейского суда по правам человека от 17.06.2010 «Дело Щербаков (Shcherbakov) против России» [англ.]

a detention facility in the town of Ryazan. Thereafter he was returned to the remand prison and stayed there until his release on 15 July 2002.
12. The parties presented different accounts of the conditions of detention in the remand prison.

1. The applicant's account

13. The applicant's cells were overcrowded. The detainees had to take turns to sleep because there was usually one sleeping place for two to three of them. There was almost no light in the cells because of the metal shutters on the windows, as well as no fresh air. The lack of air was aggravated by the detainees' smoking and the applicant, a non-smoker, became a passive smoker. There was one hour of daily exercise. The applicant's eyesight deteriorated and he developed respiratory problems. In summer the average air temperature was around thirty degrees which, combined with the high humidity level, caused skin conditions to develop. The sanitary conditions were below any reasonable standard. In particular, the cells were supplied with water for only one or two hours a day and on some days there was no water supply at all. The lack of water caused intestinal problems and in 1999 the administration had to announce quarantine in that connection.
14. The lavatory pan usually stank. It was separated from the living space by a partition which was one metre high and offered no privacy. The cells were infested with bugs, lice, cockroaches and rats and the administration did nothing to disinfect the facility. The applicant contracted scabies on two occasions. The quality of food was wholly unsatisfactory. The medical assistance was grossly inadequate. Finally, the applicant was usually convoyed by a prison officer with a dog, which he considered particularly humiliating.
15. In his observations the applicant submitted a number of statements from his acquaintance Mr S. and fellow prisoners Mr K. and Mr M.
(a) Statement by Mr S.
16. In a statement dated 29 March 2007 Mr S., who at the time was a police officer employed in the department of criminal investigations of the Soviet District Department of the Interior of the town of Tula and frequently visited IZ-71/1 for professional reasons, submitted that between 1996 and 1999 he had personally witnessed overcrowding in that prison, lack of ventilation, lack of natural lighting, lack of hot water, and generally poor condition of the building and the cells. The statement mentioned specifically that cell No. 57, in which the applicant was being held at the time, measured 10 square metres and held no fewer than ten inmates.
(b) Statement by Mr K.
17. In a statement dated 28 March 2007 Mr K. submitted that he had been detained in this prison along with the applicant in cell No. 12. According to him, the detainees took turns to sleep, as there were 33 sleeping places on three level beds for 28 to 36 people in the cell, which measured some thirty square metres. The windows were covered at all times and the lights were on constantly. Many inmates smoked and no ventilation system was installed in the cell to evacuate the smoke. It was stiflingly hot during summer and fresh water was only available a few hours a day. The cell was infested with lice, cockroaches and rats. Mr K. also submitted that cell No. 57 was situated in an annex building. All cells in that building were of the same size and measured 10 to 12 square metres. Cells Nos. 19 and 83 were of the same size as well. No special measures had been taken by the prison administration in respect of the mentioned problems at the time of his detention.
(c) Statement by Mr M.
18. In a statement dated 30 March 2007 Mr M. submitted that between February 1997 and August 2002 he had been detained in this prison along with the applicant, but in different cells. Mr M. confirmed that the prison had been constantly overcrowded, with the inm

> 1 2 3 ... 13 14 15