2015: European Court of Human Rights condemns Greece for the living conditions in Greek prisons

In 2015, 7 ECtHR decisions were issued finding that Greece had violated Articles 3 and/or 13 of the ECHR regarding the living conditions in prisons. 

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights (hereafter the ECHR) recognizes the absolute right not to be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and thus enshrines one of the fundamental values of democratic societies. Article 13 establishes the right of anyone whose rights under the ECHR have been violated to have access to an effective remedy before national authorities, and  imposes an obligation on the State to provide appropriate remedies for this purpose.

The imposition of a custodial sentence serves specific purposes (prevention, reintegration of the individual) and its imposition results in the deprivation of the right to liberty. This limitation is expected to affect in some way the other rights of the individual.

However, in order for the conditions of detention to comply with the requirements of Article 3 of the ECHR, the authorities must ensure that a person is detained in conditions compatible with respect for human dignity, that the manner and method of execution of a custodial sentence or other type of detention measure do not subject the person concerned to distress or hardship of an intensity exceeding the unavoidable level of suffering inherent in detention and that, given the practical demands of imprisonment, this person’s health and wellbeing are adequately secured  (see more in 1, 2).

The situation in Greek prisons is an issue that has been repeatedly commented on by the Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CPT) which has concluded that far too many prisoners in Greece continue to be held in conditions which represent an affront to their human dignity (see 1, 2,  3). The Greek Ombudsman has also spoken about the chronic problems of the Greek prison system (see this Report for 2020-2021).

Overcrowding, inadequate buildings and medical care, operational deficiencies, unsuitable living conditions and generally inadequate facilities have on several occasions been the reasons cited by the ECtHR for finding that Greece had violated Article 3 of the ECHR, as the conditions have been judged to constitute degrading treatment. Exceedingly small personal and collective spaces, the absence of privacy, the lack of natural lighting, ventilation and heating, failure to comply with basic health requirements, the absence of exercise activities, work or education for the prisoners are some of the other issues that have been raised. It is noted at this point that when prison overcrowding reaches a certain point and the personal space corresponding to each prisoner is below 3 sq.m. this fact alone may be sufficient for the ECtHR to conclude that the applicant’s conditions of detention constitute treatment contrary to Article 3 of the Convention.

Furthermore, the lack of a real and effective remedy in national law that allows individuals to complain about the conditions in which they are detained has also been repeatedly condemned by the ECtHR as a violation of Article 13 of the ECHR.

It is also  worth mentioning that Greece is under enhanced surveillance in the context of a different case regarding detention conditions for prisoners, which indicates that this problem is systemic.

In 2015, the ECtHR issued 7 decisions finding that Greece had violated Articles 3 or 13 of the ECHR, due to the detention conditions of prisoners.

1. March 2015, Bouros and others v. Greece (appeal nos. 51653/12, 50753/11, 25032/12, 66616/12, 67930/12).

In these 5 appeals the appellants complained about the conditions of their detention in the prisons of Larissa, Korydallos and Diavata. Due to the similarity of the appeals, both in terms of the facts and the substantive problem they raised, the ECtHR chose to hear them together and issue a single decision.

The ECtHR considering the lack of personal space (under 3 m2) in Korydallos and Diavata prisons and the general material conditions in Larissa prison (lack of personal space, prisoners sleeping on mattresses on the floor or sharing a bed, dirty blankets and mattresses, provision of hygiene products in small quantities, provision of heating for short periods only) concluded that 4 of the 5 applicants had suffered degrading treatment during their detention, in breach of Article 3 of the ECHR.

The ECtHR stated, among other things, that a) the personal space of each prisoner was less than 2 square meters, b) the bathrooms did not meet the minimum standards of hygiene, c) the food was so poor in nutritional value that HIV-positive people were at risk of worsening symptoms due to the weakening of their bodies, and d) the premises were not sufficiently heated. Furthermore, according to the claims of the applicants, i) diagnoses were made without the doctors conducting an individual examination of each prisoner, ii) there was no doctor specializing in communicable diseases in the hospital, iii) transfers to an outside hospital were significantly delayed, iv) the administration of drugs was often stopped without explanation, or the start of their treatment was delayed, allegations which the government did not really refute, (f) the applicants were simply HIV positive and had not manifested the AIDS disease and as such there was no need to place them in solitary confinement. The court concluded that there was a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR both individually and in combination with Article 14, finding that the applicants suffered inhuman and degrading treatment.

The ECtHR also found that there had been a violation of Article 13 of the ECHR, as the applicants did not have at the time of the appeal any legal means through which they could effectively complain about the conditions of their detention in the Korydallos prison hospital.

4. September 2015, Lavrentiadis v. Greece (appeal no. 29896/13)

The case concerns the conditions of detention at the Psychiatric Detention Center of Korydallos, where the applicant was temporarily detained. It is noted that the appellant had multiple health problems and was in a wheelchair, unable to move independently. He also claimed that during the period of his detention his health condition worsened due to the interruption of his therapeutic treatments as well as the poor conditions of detention.

The ECtHR recognised that a) the lack of appropriate medical treatment, or, more generally, the detention of a patient in inappropriate conditions, can as a rule constitute treatment contrary to Article 3, b) the conditions in which the applicant remained for 18 months were incompatible with his physical disability and the seriousness of his health condition and c) the applicant did not receive appropriate and specialized support to meet his most basic needs. The court therefore concluded that there had been a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR as the conditions the applicant had to endure during his detention must have caused him both mental and physical suffering and reduced his human dignity.

The ECtHR also ruled that there was a violation of Article 5 para. 4 of the ECHR, as well as of Article 13 of the ECHR.

5. October 2015, Niazai and others v. Greece (appeal no. 36673/13).

In this case, 26 applicants complained about the conditions of their detention in the prisons of Ioannina and Corfu during the years 2013-2014.

The ECtHR stated that in the context of its previous decisions it has repeatedly found a violation of Article 3 due to the conditions of detention both in the prisons of Ioannina and in the prisons of Corfu. Finding no reason to depart from its previous jurisprudence on similar issues, it concluded that applicants Nos. 1-3, 5-9, 11-14, 17-26 were detained in conditions incompatible with Article 3 of the ECHR .

6. November 2015, Filippopoulos v. Greece (appeal no. 41800/13).

The case concerns the conditions of detention in the prisons of Corinth, where the applicant was temporarily detained in the years 2012-2013.

The ECtHR ruled that there was a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR (due to personal space of less than 3 square meters, a cell that did not have a dining room, lack of privacy due to the absence of doors in the toilets, and a lack of ventilation), as well as of Article 13 of the ECHR (the appeals processes provided did not meet the requirements of Article 13 of the ECHR).

7. November 2015, Koutsospyros and others v. Greece (appeal no. 36688/13).

The case concerns the detention conditions in the prisons of Ioannina, where the 3 applicants were detained until 2013.

The ECtHR recalling, among other things, that a) it has already ruled many times for a violation of Article 3 of the ECHR due to the conditions of detention that generally exist in Ioannina prisons and b) in order for a system to protect the rights of prisoners deriving from Article 3 to be effective , states must establish an effective mechanism that allows for a quick end to any treatment contrary to article 3 of the Convention. The court therefore found that there had been a violation of articles 3 and 13 with regard to the third applicant.

It is noted that the part of the appeal concerning the first 2 applicants was dismissed due to non-exhaustion of domestic remedies pursuant to Article 35 of the ECHR.