BOTEZATU A OSTATNÍ proti Rumunsku

FOURTH SECTION

DECISION

Application no. 14497/21
Marius-Ninel BOTEZATU against Romania
and 19 other applications

(see appended table)

The European Court of Human Rights (Fourth Section), sitting on 26 March 2026 as a Committee composed of:

Anne Louise Bormann, President,
Sebastian Răduleţu,
András Jakab, judges,

and Viktoriya Maradudina, Acting Deputy Section Registrar,

Having regard to the above applications against Romania lodged with the Court under Article 34 of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (“the Convention”) on the various dates indicated in the appended table,

Having regard to the observations submitted by the respondent Government and the observations in reply submitted by the applicants,

Having deliberated, decides as follows:

• FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The list of applicants is set out in the appended table.

The applicants’ complaints under Article 3 of the Convention concerning the inadequate conditions of detention were communicated to the Romanian Government (“the Government”).

• THE LAW
  1. Joinder of the applications

Having regard to the similar subject matter of the applications, the Court finds it appropriate to examine them jointly in a single decision.

2. Complaints under Article 3 of the Convention (inadequate conditions of detention)

Having examined all the material before it, the Court considers that for the reasons stated below, the present applications are inadmissible.

The applicants complained principally of the inadequate conditions of their detention. They relied on Article 3 of the Convention.

The Government argued that the applicants had failed to exhaust the available effective remedies for their complaints about the inadequate conditions of their detention, as the complaint with the judge responsible for supervising the deprivation of liberty (plângerea în fața judecătorului de supraveghere a privării de libertate), provided for by Article 56 of Law no. 254/2013, had become an effective remedy for grievances similar to those of the applicants.

The Court recalls that in Văscăuțanu v. Romania (dec.), no. 10120/23, §§ 47–59, 18 November 2025, it held that the remedy, which consists of lodging a complaint with the judge responsible for supervising the deprivation of liberty (plângerea în fața judecătorului de supraveghere a privării de libertate), provided for by Article 56 of Law no. 254/2013, constituted, as of 6 April 2023, an effective remedy enabling individuals who allege that they are being held in inadequate conditions of detention to put an end to their situation that they denounced as being contrary to Article 3 of the Convention.

In light of all the material in its possession, the Court observes that the applicants, who allege that they are being held in inadequate conditions of detention, did not indicate that they pursued the available remedy before the domestic courts (see Văscăuțanu, cited above, § 65). Therefore, their applications must be dismissed for failure to exhaust domestic remedies.

The Government also invoked other grounds of inadmissibility to argue that the present applications must be rejected.

Since it has already upheld the Government’s objection on the non‑exhaustion of domestic remedies, the Court does not consider it necessary to examine further the other arguments raised by the Government.

In view of the above, the Court finds that the applicants’ complaints concerning the periods set out in the appended table must be rejected for failure to exhaust the domestic remedy laid down in Article 56 of Law no. 254/2013, in accordance with Article 35 §§ 1 and 4 of the Convention.

For these reasons, the Court, unanimously,

Decides to join the applications;

Declares the applications inadmissible.

Done in English and notified in writing on 16 April 2026.

Viktoriya Maradudina Anne Louise Bormann
Acting Deputy Registrar President

APPENDIX

List of applications raising complaints under Article 3 of the Convention

(inadequate conditions of detention)