REPORT on the visit to the Gherla penitentiary
On 19 July 2000, two APADOR-CH representatives visited the Gherla penitentiary, county of Cluj.
On the day of this visit, the penitentiary accommodated 1944 inmates who shared 1770 beds. The penitentiary has an additional section in Cluj-Napoca, with 330 detainees (regular and semi-open regime). Out of the 2274 detainees, 1901 had been pronounced a final sentence, 152 had been sentenced by a first instance court and 209 were detained on remand. 12 of the detainees were petty offenders whose fines had been converted into terms in prison (as the 12 had not been present before the courts when their fines had been turned into terms in prisons, they applied to the courts upon their arrival in the penitentiary to have their terms in prison converted into terms of community service). The number of detainees sentenced to terms of less than 10 years (915) is almost equal with the number of inmates sentenced to punishments higher than 10 years’ imprisonment (986, as follows: 368 sentenced to 10 to 15 years, 561 sentenced to 15 to 20 years and 57 to terms over 20 years). The detainees selected for the semi-open sections are those whose behavior is appropriate, who have not relapsed, have served at least one fifth of their term and stay in touch with their families (the penitentiary management consider that the last condition is essential). There are 41 women and 51 minors in the penitentiary.
The penitentiary was being extensively renovated and modernized ("capital repairs"). The large rooms, accommodating 60 to 80 detainees, that APADOR-CH found excessively overcrowded and in a very poor state during the previous visits, were being turned into mess halls and activity rooms. The detainees have been transferred either to other penitentiaries or to the new sections built within the Gherla penitentiary. The repairs are paid by the penitentiary, which has been able to find almost all the necessary qualified workers among the detainees.
1077 detainees went to work (in the past few months, over 50% of the detainees have been working). Most of them work in Cluj-Napoca, at "Hidroconstructia" Ltd. and in road maintenance, on the basis of a contract concluded with the Townhall. The contract with "Hidroconstructia" represents an important source of income for the penitentiary (the average monthly wages obtained by a detainee in June amounted to lei 1,570,000). Other 280 detainees work at the furniture factory in the penitentiary, owned by "Multiproduct", an autonomous administration.
The animal farm breeds about 1400 pigs and 100 cattle, covering the penitentiary’s meat demands. The yield from the 13 hectares of agricultural land does not cover the penitentiary’s demands. Moreover, when Law 1/2000 is going to be enforced, the land will probably be claimed by its rightful owners, in which situation the penitentiary will have to be supported by the DGP officials to get other plots of land.
The staff amounts to 310, 250 of them working directly with the detainees. The cultural-educational department is staffed by two officers (a history teacher and a social worker) and by 3 civilian teachers. Since the 1997 fall, a probation experiment has been organized in the penitentiary jointly with the Cluj-Napoca Probation Office and with the association "Prison Fellowships". The association participated with 6 specialists (psychologists, social workers and jurists) and the penitentiary, with a teacher and 3 non-commissioned officers. The penitentiary includes a primary school (1st to 8th grade, known as the Gherla Primary School no. 3, subordinated both to DGP and to the Ministry of National Education). 100 detainees attended these courses at the time of the visit. The penitentiary also organizes training courses for carpenters (120 detainees, at the furniture factory) and computer operators (16 detainees, a course organized jointly with the association "Ajutor familial" from Gherla, which also brought 5 computers to the penitentiary. Medical assistance is ensured by 4 general practitioners, a dentist and 12 medical assistants.
The courts admit all the applications by means of which the penitentiary management asks for the release of detainees on parole. During the first semester of this year, the commission discussed the applications made by 508 detainees and submitted 472 applications to the courts, which admitted all the applications.
The penitentiary cooperates with the association "Ajutor familial" based in Gherla (the computer operator training course) and with the Cluj branch of the League for the Defence of Human Rights. Last school year, 300 students of the Cluj Napoca Law School worked as interns in the penitentiary. The detainees have not participated in any cultural-educational activities outside the penitentiary, but several folk and modern music bands as well as the Cluj Napoca National Theatre performed for the detainees in the penitentiary. A sports competition (football, volleyball, table tennis, and chess) took place between staff and detainee teams from the Gherla and Aiud penitentiaries on Penitentiary Day this year (29 June). About 100 detainees watched the football games on the local stadium.
Written correspondence is unrestricted and uncensored. There are 3 pay phones in the penitentiary that the detainees can use once a month, after they apply to the penitentiary management. A great deal of the bureaucracy encountered in other penitentiaries in connection with phone calls, leading sometimes to violations of the secrecy of correspondence, is avoided at the Gherla penitentiary. According to the penitentiary management, they only keep records of the detainees whose applications are denied for various reasons ("especially violations of discipline"). Still, APADOR-CH stressed that the right to make phone calls should be regarded not as a reward, but as a right – the right to correspondence – which, similar to the right to written correspondence, cannot be denied or suspended.
Room representatives are appointed based on twofold system, involving the detainees’ options (who cast votes for their inmates) as well as the management’s decision (who approve or reject the detainees’ choice. Although APADOR-CH partly agrees with the penitentiary management who chooses to keep under control the detainees’ options, the association considers, however, that an unconditional acceptance of the detainees’ choice should eventually prevail – and be approached more boldly – for at least two reasons: a) to avoid the suspicion that room representatives are informers and b) in order to encourage the detainees to become more involved and committed to organizing the life and activity in penitentiary. If it turns out that the detainees knowingly made an option that jeopardizes the smooth functioning of penitentiary life, the management can step in to make the appropriate adjustments.
Violations of internal regulations are investigated and sanctioned based on incident reports. A positive aspect is that all detainees found to have violated the regulation are heard by the officer in charge of discipline and by the disciplinary commission, regardless of the type of violation or sanction. 58 disciplinary punishments were applied in the first half of the year 2000, quite a low number, according to the penitentiary management. The APADOR-CH representatives consider, however, that the ratio of punishments for "disrespectful attitude towards the staff" – 25% - was too high. The association does not imply that such behavior is appropriate, but rather that these punishment should be carefully considered before being applied. Detention conditions are still far cry from the standards Romanian has pledged to ensure by means of international treaties in this field; often enough, the situation in penitentiaries does not even meet Romania’s own standards – due to overcrowding, poor hygiene, almost complete lack of cultural and leisure activities, etc. Under these circumstances, the inmates have to deal for years with conditions that sometimes violate even their most basic rights; consequently, their "disrespectful" attitude is easy to account for.
One day before, three non-commissioned officers had been dismissed for their behavior towards the detainees. According to the commander, the deputy in charge of guards had run a check of the employees at the end of the work day. He had discovered that the three non-commissioned officers had received "gifts" from detainees in exchange for "favors" such as sending letters, drawing p fake reward reports, etc.
The kitchen was being renovated (its walls and ceiling were damp at the time of this visit). The management was going to modernize it by purchasing new kettles,
Changing the ventilation system, painting and tiling the walls. The work advanced at a slow pace because of the lack of funds, but the management estimated that the renovation was going to be completed by the end of the year. There was no running water in the penitentiary for two days, so that they had to use the water they had previously stored for this purpose. The penitentiary has its own thermal plant.
The day’s menu consisted of: breakfast – vegetables with meat/tea and jam (detainees who do not work), potatoes with meat/tea and jam (detainees who work), margarine, biscuits, tea and jam (diet menu); lunch – bean soup and potatoes with meat (detainees who do not work), potato soup and beans with meat (detainees who work), bone soup with rice and potatoes with meat (diet menu); dinner – rice pilaf with bacon and vegetables (regular menu), pasta with cheese and milk (diet menu). 105 kg. pork, 85 kg. beef, 50 kg. beef by-products, 17 kg. pork by-products and 93 kg. bacon and lard had been used to prepare the day’s meals. The APADOR-CH representatives noted that the second course for lunch contained only bacon/fat and no meat. The detainees do not supervise the preparation of food as they do in other penitentiaries. The APADOR-CH representatives told the penitentiary management about this system (recommending that it be employed at Gherla, too) and praised its usefulness: in all penitentiaries where it has been employed the food quality is higher and the detainees are much less suspicious that the foodstuffs they should get are used inappropriately.
It is placed on the ground floor of the first pavilion. The building was being renovated (about 50-60% of the work had been completed). The ground floor has been almost completely modernized. The doctors work in two shifts – two in the morning, two in the afternoon. Each doctor examines about 50 patients daily. Sometimes, however, the demands are even higher, so that on one of the days prior to the APADOR-CH visit a single doctor had examined 130 patients in 7 hours – which means a little over 3 minutes per patient. The situation is even worse, considering that the doctors also have to tend to the military staff (for three hours in the morning and two in the afternoon, according to the rules). APADOR-CH wishes to reiterate the request it has constantly made over the last several years, namely that the medical personnel should tend only to the detainees (except for emergency cases or the regular check-ups of the staff that they have to attend). About 60 inmates had mental conditions. 39 of them were treated in their cells. The doctor said that about 10 detainees should be committed to mental institutions. Respiratory, digestive and skin diseases have the highest incidence rate among detainees. The number of self-maimings had decreased: only 23 such cases had been recorded in the first half of the year 2000. The Gherla penitentiary resorts to the Dej penitentiary hospital for more serious cases, but the latter work "rather as a bigger infirmary" than as a proper hospital. Although it conducts investigations and examinations, most patients are then sent to the hospitals in Cluj-Napoca.
Room 17
There was only one detainee in this room which had 9 beds. The room was depressing: 8 of the 9 beds had no sheets, the walls were dirty and scratched. The toilet was separated from the rest of the room by a wall one meter high and the stench was unbearable. The detainee A. M. had been isolated there because he was HIV positive in an advanced stage and infected with hepatitis (the C virus), and other detainees would have been afraid to stay in the same room with him. The detainee had applied for a suspension of his punishment and had a hearing scheduled for 31 August at the Gherla Court. The head doctor said that he had already been examined by the Cluj-Napoca forensic laboratory and their findings supported his application. (A.M.’s release papers from the Cluj hospital had reached similar conclusions.) Still, a letter sent by the Bucharest-Jilava hospital to the Gherla court (no. 1051 of 13 July 2000) mentioned that the hospital would be able to treat A. M. Under these circumstances, it is hard to understand why the detainee got no treatment at the time of this visit and why he was kept in the dreadful conditions mentioned above, which actually amounted to severe isolation, instead of being committed to the penitentiary infirmary at least.
Room 2 (isolation)
No one was confined in this room at the time of this visit. The room had been renovated (its walls were tiled and it was very well lit). The toilet had a tiled seat and was provided with a modern flushing system; unfortunately, it was separated from the rest of the room by a wall 1.5 meters high which does not ensure the detainees’ privacy. The explanation – namely that DGP took decided that non-commissioned officers should be able to watch the detainees at all times lest they should try to maim themselves – are unfounded in the opinion of APADOR-CH. The detainees who want to resort to such gestures could do it at other moments during the day or at nighttime. But depriving the inmates of the right to privacy when the use the toilet and allowing the smell to invade the rooms amounts to a degrading treatment in the opinion of APADOR-CH.
Room 3 (isolation)
The room was identical with Room 2. It accommodated Marcel Muntean, sentenced to 10 days of isolation. He was punished because he had allegedly instigated the other inmates to disobey the officer in charge of his section. The detainee denies this allegation, but admits that for a few moments e had refused to move to the room the head of the section had chosen for him. He considered that the punishment was excessive and based on a serious deed, with even more serious consequences, that he did not commit – instigating the inmates to disobey the head of the section. The documents included in his penitentiary file – such as the declaration of the detainee Lorinczi Ferencz, an eyewitness – do not support the allegations. Consequently, APADOR-CH asks the penitentiary management to reconsider the case and to take appropriate measures, function of the deeds the detainee had indeed committed.
First floor – Room 39, minors
About 50% of the first floor had been renovated. The room was shared by 27 minors and contained 30 beds. The equipment and bed sheets were new and clean. The room was very clean, well lit and ventilated. The lavatory was completely tiled and separated from the rest of the room. It consisted of 2 sinks, a mirror and two modern toilet cabins. The inmates went out for walks for one hour to one hour and a half daily (except on Saturdays, when they clean their room, and on Sundays). They take showers once or twice a week (function of the water supply). The room was provided with two TV sets and a tape player with radio (brought by the inmates). The correspondence was uncensored and unlimited. The inmates were allowed to make two phone calls a month, being scheduled by the alphabet. They went to the club every week to read and to play chess and table tennis. They had not got newspapers in a month. They got toothpaste, soap and toilet paper once a month. The inmates were allowed to talk to their lawyers at the penitentiary (in the visiting area, seated at a table) but their discussions are attended by the guards.
The shower room (first floor)
The shower room had been modernized. It had 20 stainless steel showers, tiled walls and floor, and an anteroom, also tiled, with new pegs for the detainees’ clothes. The 600 detainees accommodated on this floor took at least one shower a week, function of the schedule of delivery, pressure and flow of the water.
A former detention room that used to have 90 beds was being turned into a mess hall (which was going to function as a club outside meal hours). Each floor is going to be provided with such mess halls.
Room 28 (detainees unfit to work)
The room had not been renovated yet. It contained 15 beds, shared by 16 detainees. The ceiling had a huge damp spot from a leaking pipe. The equipment was worn out. According to the penitentiary management, only a third of the detainees had got new blankets. The detainees asked to watch TV longer at nighttime and agreed to watch less during the day if the consumption of electric power was an issue. They said that none of the detainees would be disturbed by this and committed themselves to turn the sound off in case anyone asked. The APADOR-CH representatives consider that this request is acceptable, especially as the detainees who do not work and have nothing to do during the day cannot sleep at night because of the lack of activity. The inmates complained that although they ask to meet the penitentiary commander, sometimes their request is denied. Gabor Gavrila suffered of lung fibrosis and had asked several times to be transferred to the room which accommodates elderly detainees who do not work, which is a no smoking room. Although Dr. Onuta agreed, the officer on duty (Onut Socaciu) did not and sent the detainee back to Room 28. The inmate asked in writing to see the commander three times, but got no reply. Attila Tarlea had the sole of his left foot cut in an accident prior to detention and the wound was infected. He alleged that his wound was not treated properly (his wound was dressed only once every 2-3 days). Fekete Gavril had been transferred from the Arad penitentiary for judicial purposes. As the reason for his transfer has ceased to exist, he asked to be transferred back to Arad or, if possible, to Oradea, where his family lives. The detainees are never taken to the club or visited by trainers. They do not even know who the head of the section is. Nor are they taken to church on Sundays if they ask to. They go out for walks for about 10-20 minutes, once or twice a week. The room was provided with a sink. The toilet cabin was in a deplorable state: its walls were damp and the stench was unbearable.
Second floor – Room 43 (multi-offenders sentenced by a first instance court who do not work)
The second floor is renovated in proportion of 40%. The room had 42 beds and accommodated 30 detainees. The walls were damp, with flaking paint. The equipment was old and worn out. The detainees took one shower a week. The lavatory consisted of a toilet and a concrete sink with 2 taps. The room had been debugged only once in 2000 and the detainees complained that they had lice. The room was provided with a TV set brought from home by the detainees. The daily walk (except for Saturdays and Sundays lasts for half an hour). The detainees had not received any newspapers in four months. They complained about the food quality and abut the ex officio lawyers, who lack interest in their cases, so that their activity consists only of being present in court. On the other hand, the detainees found it impossible to report to the commander. The cell door is opened in the hot season to let some fresh air in. The trainers did not work at all with these detainees. The APADOR-CH representatives appreciated that they were allowed to go to visits in dressing gowns instead of the usual penitentiary uniforms. Same as in Room 28 and with almost the same arguments, the detainees asked that they be allowed to watch TV more at nighttime. In the summer of 1999, the detainee Szabo Sandor had filed a complaint with the Military Prosecutor’s Office against the violent treatment and abuses perpetrated by police officers from Cluj-Napoca against him. Although he was heard by Prosecutor Babiciu in November 1999, his complaint had still not been solved as of this writing. APADOR-CH asks the penitentiary management to support the detainee in solving this situation. Horia Mocian had Bazedow’s disease and asked for a more attentive treatment (the doctor examined him only once a week).
The shower room was similar to that on the first floor.
Room 58 – dangerous detainees
The room accommodated 7 detainees in 9 beds. It had been renovated and detention conditions were very good, same as in Room 39 (minors). That is why all the detainees insist not to be transferred from this room. Their only request – same as rooms 28 and 43 – was to be allowed to watch TV at nighttime after lights out. The daily walk takes about 30 minutes. Starting the previous month, the detainees got soap, toothpaste and toilet paper. Room 58 is one of the few still that have modern intercom systems by means of which the detainees can communicate with the guards.
Room 104 (women)
The room contained 4 beds and accommodated 4 women. They go out for walks for about one hour every day. They can go to the medical office weekly, on Wednesdays, except for emergency cases. The inmates can make two phone calls a month and are allowed to discuss with their lawyers in penitentiary. However, these talks are attended by two guards – a woman and a man. APADOR-CH asks the penitentiary management to organize the client-lawyer meeting so as to ensure the privacy of this relation. The wall that separated the toilet from the room did not go from wall to wall, so that the toilet smells penetrated in the room. The sink was placed in the room. The detainees got books but no newspapers. The loudspeaker installed in the room allowed them to listen to the programs broadcast in the penitentiary, but the room had no TV set. It had broken and it was going to be placed in the hall anyway, because the other rooms had no TV sets either.
Room 105 (minor females)
The room had 4 beds and accommodated 4 detainees. They said that the food was fairly good. There was no TV set in the room, but the inmates had a radio set and a tape player, brought from home by one of them. They had got no newspapers in almost 6 months. The lavatory consisted of a sink (in the room) and a dirty toilet, separated from the rest of the room by two walls that did not go all the way to the ceiling, so that the air in the room was stale. The detainees complained that they had been abused by the guards at times. Hot water ran on Wednesdays and Sundays, when they could take showers.
Room 12 (women)
3 women were accommodated in this room with 4 beds. They went for walks daily (except for Wednesdays and Sundays, when they were allowed to bathe) for about one hour. The detainees asked for a TV set – at least one for the whole section, placed in the hallway – and to be allowed to take longer walks, to the extent possible. Gabor Suzana and Czilika Vera complained that some of the contents of the parcels they got from home went missing (cartons of cigarettes, phone cards). The penitentiary management explained that in a number of cases (47 in 2000) the penitentiary had refused to accept deteriorated parcels or those whose weight did not correspond with what was written on paper. They had even complained several times to the post office and to the Railroad Company. The officers said, however, that there had been fewer such cases over the past months. APADOR-CH asks the penitentiary management to take all necessary measures to avoid such events in the future and, if they continue, to make sure the detainees recovered the prejudice, even by suing the post office and the railroad company, if necessary.
The library had 7122 volumes. Once every two weeks, the librarian goes to each detention section and lends books to those interested. One of the detainees, Alexandru Gheorghiu, had organized four painting exhibitions: 1996 and 1998 – Bucharest, 1997 – Cluj-Napoca, 1999 – Brasov and 2000 – Switzerland.
The penitentiary has 6 yards of about 100 square meters each, located in the same area. Usually, only the detainees of one room are allowed to go out in a yard at the same time, allegedly in order to avoid violent actions, revenges, exchanges of objects, etc. APADOR-CH considers that the penitentiary management should find a more effective way of using the yards, so that the time spent by detainees outdoors is as close as possible to the norms in force or even exceeds it, if possible.
This area had been modernized about 2 years before. It allows for the three types of visits: round the table – 6 places, in the booth – one place and regular visits – 6 places. The staff in charge of this sector has never refused to give the detainees their parcels if they exceed the normal weight permitted by regulations (except for cases where there is a clear risk of food poisoning).
Petru Satmar complained to the APADOR-CH representatives that he had been beaten three times in 1999 – once in January, on 18 June and on 14 December – by non-commissioned officer Hodis. The detainee and his mother had tried to report to the commander, but they could not. They suspect that some employees close to the commander have done their best to prevent such a meeting. The APADOR-CH representatives had thus further indications that it is hard for the detainees to meet the commander. As the detainee could not solve his case in the penitentiary, he complained to the Cluj Napoca Military Prosecutor’s Office and was heard by a prosecutor on 27 June. APADOR-CH asks the penitentiary management to take steps to solve the detainee’s complaint as fast as possible. Also, until the case is solved, APADOR-CH asks that non-commissioned officer Hodis be transferred from the sector where Petru Satmar is detained.
Valerian
Stan
George Anglitoiu