owever, at that time the applicant shared the cell with more than thirty inmates. In 2004 the number of inmates in his cell exceeded the limit, varying between twenty and forty. In these circumstances the applicant had to share a bed with another inmate.
The applicant was confined in one cell with a HIV-positive inmate and others suffering from tuberculosis and hepatitis B and C.
The concrete floor in the cell was always wet because the water tap was broken. Besides the fact that water ran freely on the floor, the accumulation of humidity was conducive to the spread of infectious diseases among the cell inmates. The cell was infested with bugs, cockroaches and lice and was poorly ventilated.
From 23 December 2003 until 6 January 2004 the applicant was not allowed to shower.
No radio receiver, TV set or light reading such as crossword puzzles for entertainment were allowed by the authorities of the detention facility.
In late 2003 and 2004 the applicant was allowed to have meetings with his family, during which he could talk to them through a glass partition with the aid of a telephone.
2. The Government's account
21. From 24 November 2003 to 22 October 2004 the applicant was kept in cell No. 19 together with up to twenty-one detainees, the average cell population being fourteen detainees. From 22 October to 15 November 2004 the applicant was in cell No. 20, which housed up to eighteen persons, the average cell population being thirteen detainees. Both cells measured twenty-four square metres and had twelve beds. No information was submitted regarding the period from 15 November to 8 December 2004.
22. Each cell was equipped with a table, two benches and a toilet. Each cell had both natural and mandatory artificial ventilation, as well as ventilator windows. The necessary disinfection or sanitary measures were taken on a regular basis.
23. The applicant was provided with an individual bed and bedding, including a mattress, a pillow, a pillowslip, a cover, two bed sheets and a towel. Once a week he was allowed to have a fifteen-minute shower.
3. The applicant's complaints about his
conditions of detention
24. According to the applicant, in January 2004 he complained to the Moskovskiy District Court of Tver about the conditions of his detention in remand centre No. 69/1. On an unspecified date the President of the District Court sent a letter to the applicant stating that no complaint from him had been received by that court. As he was unsatisfied with the reply of the District Court, the applicant wrote to the Tver Regional Court. No reply was received.
25. The applicant complained about the conditions of his detention in the remand centre to the Office of the Russian President. In reply to this complaint he received a letter dated 27 August 2004 from the prosecutor's office of the Tver Region, which confirmed that the population of the remand centre had exceeded the limit (twenty-one inmates compared with a limit of twelve persons) at the relevant time. In the same letter the prosecutor's office rejected the applicant's complaint concerning the allegedly unlawful limitations on visits from his family members, including extended visits from his wife.
C. Detention in Tver colony No. 1
26. Before July 2005 the applicant was detained in Tver colony No. 10. In July 2005 he was transferred to Tver colony No. 1. In both facilities he was reprimanded on several occasions for breaching the prison discipline rules. He was put into a punishment cell for five and later for fifteen days.
27. On 28 November 2005 the disciplinary committee decided that his prison regime should be changed to a strict regime with effect from 7 December 2005 on account of his repeated breaches of prison discipline.
> 1 2 3 ... 22 23 24 ... 36 37 38
Zaki.ru законы и право
поиск по сайту
каталог документов
добавить сайт Zaki.ru в избранное
Правовые акты международные
Правовые акты Российской Федерации
