Report on the visit to the Jilava Penitentiary
On April 15th, 2003, three representatives of APADOR-CH visited the Jilava Penitentiary in Bucureşti.
On the day of the visit, the penitentiary hosted 3187 detainees in 2551 beds, thus still qualifying as the most crowded site in the whole penitentiary system. A serious difficulty was created by the ratio between the number of „operative” staff and that of detainees, which is approximately 1/30. 490 inmates went to work – 127 in agriculture (in Vidra and at the „Leoser” company), 13 at „Sitaco”, 30 at the Palace of Justice where repair works are going on, and the rest inside the penitentiary, for various services.
Due to insufficient funding, the penitentiary was unable to start the rehabilitation work on the prison buildings and the plumbing. The older problem of water quality was only partially solved, since pipes were replaced only between the water source and the building, but not inside the building.
According to the management of the penitentiary, the use of chains as a restraint instrument was completely abolished, except in the case of Greek detainee Passaris, who is indicted in a murder one case and whom the penitentiary considers extremely dangerous. The representatives of APADOR-CH were of opinion that, even in this case, the chains should be left out, mainly because this instrument of restraint is unconditionally forbidden by both UN and European penitentiary norms. The representatives of the association also recommended that sanctions (warning, reprimand and finally suspension of the right to receive parcels) against detainees who would not take part in the daily walk should be ceased, arguing mainly that walking is a right, not an obligation of the inmates. Members of the management argued back that the walk could be compared to the weekly bath, which is mandatory, because it is meant to keep the inmates in a good state of health. The association believes that such a comparison is not appropriate, since the cleanliness of a certain inmate may influence the state of health of other detainees in the group, while his/her walking obviously may not.
There are cases when detainees who “offer information” regarding the security, order and discipline inside the penitentiary are rewarded by cutting days off their prison term. Although such a practice is acceptable under the detainee rights regulations, the representatives of APADOR-CH considered that it encourages delation and may lead to tragic events, such as revenge against informers.
Cell searches are conducted once a week for detainees who are considered dangerous and once a month for the rest (and also, in both cases, “as often as necessary”)
All detainees are obliged to wear, in all situations, the uniform provided by the penitentiary. The unit in Jilava is dubbed a “prevention and transit” penitentiary, which means that most detainees have not been yet convicted. European norms require that, under such circumstances, detainees have the right to wear their own clothes.
2.1. The kitchen area
The kitchen area, and especially the kitchen itself, are in deplorable state, mainly because of the mould and moisture on the walls. A single room was in a better condition: the cooking room, which had been recently whitewashed.
There was vegetable soup and potato gravy with bacon for lunch. 20 special portions had been cooked for diabetes patients (the “meat” in these portions was mostly ribs and fat) and 78 for tuberculosis patients. For breakfast, the inmates had had tea, biscuits, margarine, with an egg every three days for diabetes patients. Pasta and cheese was on the menu for dinner. 193 kilos of bacon and 35 kilos of pork had been used for lunch. The 15 Moslem detainees get exactly the same food, without the bacon. They are served beef on very rare occasions, and only if it is included in the general menu.
In the vegetable room, potatoes were washed in three big pools of decayed stone.
2.2 The Infirmary Ward
In January 2003, two inmates died. On January 10th, around 6 o’clock in the morning, detainee Constantin Ristea went to the infirmary, complaining of a cough and sore throat. At 6.30, he was checked by the nurse on duty, taken back to his cell and then brought in again at 7.00, when the doctor arrived. Shortly after stepping into the ward, the detainee dropped dead. At the moment when APADOR-CH visited the penitentiary, the forensic report had not arrived yet, and it was only suspected that the death may had been caused by a heart condition (cardiac insufficiency). Constantin Ristea did not have a medical history, his only known condition - “bronchial asthma” – having been noted into his file by the police who had arrested him. In such conditions, the representatives of the association were intrigued by Constantin Ristea’s sudden death, especially since they had information that the detainee had been beaten by the guards that very night. The association expects the penitentiary to send a copy of the forensic report. The second case, detainee Ion Dragomirescu, died on January 25th at the Bucureşti-Jilava Penitentiary, of coronary ischemia, arterial hypertension and tuberculosis sequels.
The penitentiary hosts 5 inmates with AIDS (3 of them are in the infirmary ward), who were transferred from the infectious disease ward of the Penitentiary Hospital Jilava.
The medical staff is made of 6 doctors (two of them were on sick leave on the day of the visit) and 10 nurses. During the daily programme from 9 to 14.30, a doctor sees around 100 detainees. Worth mentioning is the fact that the 6 doctors care exclusively for the detainees, while the staff have a separate ward and different medical staff.
Room 418 of the infirmary hosted 8 detainees (it had 12 beds), including three of the AIDS patients, who are part of the national anti-AIDS programme run by the Ministry of Health. One of these patients (M.P.) who had been transferred from the Penitentiary Hospital two weeks before, complained that he had been suffering from an “ear infection” (“chronic otitis”, as the doctor present during the interview specified) for five months, yet he had not been remitted to the hospital for treatment. Another AIDS patient (R.) had recently undergone an apendectomy. He complained about the bad and insufficient food (he is on the special TBC food menu), about the lack of access to television, about the bare and cold cement floor, about washing with cold water.
Marin Tomulescu underwent surgery for arteritis on both legs and lost more than half of each foot. He needs permanent assistance, because he walks with great difficulty. Moreover, the condition has extended to his hands, as well. He has served 15 of his 22 years term and applied for an interruption of the term for medical reasons, but the Forensic Institute decided that his condition can be treated within the penitentiary system. According to the detainee, he only gets pentoxyfiline and aspirin, a completely inefficient treatment.
Ion Ciocârlan was admitted to the hospital ward as a paraplegic patient, after he suffered a fall. He complained of being sent from one hospital to another (Colibaşi and Jilava) and his state did not improve at all. Following his request for an interruption of the prison term for medical reasons, he was summoned at the Sector 1 Court of First Instance, but the hearing on April 4th 2003 was delayed because the forensic expertise had not been sent yet (his medical file showed that the expertise was completed on March 27th 2003).
The representatives of the association noted that there are no special food regulations for AIDS patients, which may seriously affect the treatment they are entitled to. The medication they get – Crixivan and Combivir – is extremely strong and causes weakness and dizziness.
The water closet consisted of two very small cubicles – one containing a Turkish toilet and a sink, the other one a concrete trough with two water taps. Hot water usually ran on Mondays, but on Wednesdays and Thursdays, in the absence of a shower, the inmates had to use a rubber hose for washing. There was not TV or radio set in the room.
The detainees in the infirmary ward were satisfied by the care received, especially from the lady doctor, but they believed they should be in a specialized hospital.
2.3 Detention rooms
Cell room no. 408 - restrictive regime, hosted two detainees (3 beds). Demis Ionel Moscu had 5 more months, out of the 10 months of restrictive regime, because he had escaped (the Court had already sentences him to 17 months in jail for escaping). Vili Vilan Stan also had 10 months of restrictions for involvement in a prison fight (3 months left). Both detainees had filed requests for the reassessment of their regime, but the requests were denied. The daily walk, in a 25 sq m “cage”, lasted about half an hour, during which the detainees were chained and supervised by the intervention team (“the masked men”). Detainees were not allowed to make phone calls, but could receive visits, with the governor’s permission (Stan had been visited four times, each time he had requested it); visits are however banned during the first three months of the restrictive regime. The room contained a Turkish toilet and a sink.
Cell room no. 409 hosted 3 detainees for life (3 beds). Only one of the three had received the final verdict – Gavril Lucian Ciupea. They were taken for the daily walk together, handcuffed and guarded by “the masked men” (no walks on Tuesdays – bath days, and on Sundays). There was no radio set in the room. Detainee Ciupea complained that, during his transfer from the Gherla penitentiary, he was not allowed to bring along his own TV set. Anserwing his complaint, the DGP explained that during transfers, the transportation of audio-video equipment “is ensured by the family or friends”. The representatives of APADOR-CH consider that such a rule is inappropriate, since penitentiaries are unable to provide enough TV and radio sets for the detainees and since the transportation, along with the other belongings of the detainee, of such equipment would imply no extra costs and no huge administration difficulties. Detainee Ciupea requested not to be taken to Craiova penitentiary in the case of a transfer, explaining that detainee Aurel Leuca, who threatened to kill him during a fight in Gherla, was there.
Cell room no. 502 hosted 17 detainees in 9 beds. They had no TV set and no radio, but they received the newspapers. The daily walk – part of the mandatory program – lasted for about 45 minutes. Detainees, who were employed for various works inside the penitentiary, were allowed to make two phone calls each month (while the others may only phone once a month, or in exceptional situations). The water closet contained a Turkish toilet, where the detainees also showered with a hose going through the wall from the sink, which was placed inside the cell itself.
Confinement room no. 1 hosted 2 detainees (2 beds), who at the moment of the visit had been taken for a walk.
Confinement room no. 3 hosted detainee Cornel Brebeanu, who was on his sixth day of confinement out of ten for “offence against staff members”. The detainee insisted he was innocent, and that he had been swearing at an inmate, not a guard. He also said he had not been heard by the discipline board, the only staff member who addressed the subject of the alleged disciplinary offence being the discipline officer. At the moment of the visit, there was a pool of water on the room floor. Brebeanu complained that, no matter how often he swept the water, the pool would still be there because, he said, “there was a leak from the sink”. The bed linen was taken out between 5.00 and 22.00 and the detainee was taken for the daily walk with handcuffs and “masked” guards.
Detainee Zete Gheorghe came back from the walk barely able to move. He was paralyzed on the left side and suffered from epilepsy, both conditions being confirmed by his medical record. He complained that, two weeks before, he had been moved out of the infirmary ward, where conditions are more acceptable, into a room with 41 inmates. What was more, he had been assigned one of the top beds and, since his epilepsy fits came back pretty often, he was afraid he might fall on the cement floor.
Detainees from cell 503 were in the walking area of section V. They said they were only taken out four times a week (there is no walk on Sundays, on Thursdays – the bath day, and on Saturdays – the day for administration and organizational work). Detainees usually went to the club once a month, where they were able to play chess, backgammon, rummy, etc. They were allowed to make phone calls once a month, or in exceptional cases, with the governor’s permission. It must be mentioned that the procedure for making phone calls was simplified in this penitentiary, consisting of putting one’s name on a list. It is however necessary that the staff cease to supervise detainees while they are making their calls from hearing distance (the supervising officer sits at a table near the phone, and therefore it is impossible for him/her not to hear what they talk about).
In cell room no. 502, there were 17 inmates in 9 beds. There was no TV or radio, just, occasionally, newspapers. Detainees complained they had lice, and that nothing was done to get rid of.
A room from the visit section has been assigned to host meeting between detainees and their legal counsel. At the moment of the visit, a detainee was inside, with his two counsels. The discussion was supervised by a guard (a woman), who told the representatives of APADOR-CH that she had orders to “listen to what was said and prevent the counsels to give detainees money, drugs, etc.” (two other inmates were also present, although they had no connection to the ongoing meeting). When the representatives of the association objected that this was a breach of confidentiality, the guard said: “You must discuss this with the governor”.
This detainee was dissatisfied on the one hand because he had been included on the list of “dangerous” detainees “for no reason at all”, and on the other hand because he was sanctioned for a disciplinary offence he had not committed. Regarding the first complaint, the representatives of the association found out that Radulescu had been dubbed as “dangerous” due to “the nature of his crime” (he was on trial for rape) and for “theft of arms and ammunition” (the penitentiary had taken into consideration this note made by the Aiud Penitentiary during a previous conviction, but did not document the claim in the current record). As for the punishment, Radulescu was denied the right to receive visits and parcels and to make phone calls for a month, because a knife found in the cell was allegedly his. He insisted that the knife did not belong to him and complained that only three cellmates were heard on the matter, although he insistently requested that any other cellmates be heard. The explanation of the staff, according to which the other cellmates “didn’t want to get involved”, is hardly believable, since the only ones who “wanted to get involved” were the three who accused Radulescu. The representatives of APADOR-CH were left under the impression that Radulescu’s punishment was not decided following a thorough and objective investigation (he wasn’t even heard by the discipline board), while his dubbing as “dangerous” was not made, as is should have, mainly based on his behaviour during detention. The detainee also remarked that the daily walk, of about 20 minutes, depends on the “mood of the masked men”.
Compared with the situation noted during the previous visit, several aspects improved:
- the chains are no longer used as a an instrument of restraint; the association considers that the use of chains must be abandoned even in the case of detainee Passaris;
- the doctors ensure medical care exclusively for detainees, not for staff as well;
- water quality was improved to a degree, although it is necessary that the DGP and the penitentiary keep working on this problem;
APADOR-CH makes the following recommendation for the DGP and the penitentiary management:
- to identify financial resources in order to rehabilitate the barracks and especially the kitchen area;
- to take the necessary steps so that special food regulation are established for AIDS patients, in accordance with the medical treatment they are entitled to;
- to ensure the confidentiality of meetings between detainees and their legal advisers;
- to make sure that the “dangerous” detainee list is based exclusively on behaviour during detention, and that disciplinary sanctions are well-documented, objective and in accordance with the DGP rules; it is necessary that detainees are heard by the discipline board each time a discipline procedure was opened; in that respect, the association believes that accusations against detainee Klaus Costel Radulescu need to be analyzed;
- to allow detainees to take their own vide-audio equipment with them when transferred;
- to analyze with attention detainee Gavril Lucian Ciupea’s request not to be transferred to Craiova;
- to set up the necessary measures so that detainees who have not received a final sentence are able to wear their own clothes;
- to cease sanctioning the detainees who refuse daily walk and rewarding the “informers”;
- to cease the practice of “electing” cell chiefs (and deputies); no detainee must have attributions which place him/her above the others;
- unlike in any other penitentiary, including the maximum security ones, the “masked men” are a constant presence all around the prison, which creates a tense atmosphere for the detainees, especially because of their special, repressive missions, their all-black gear, their faces completely covered, their arms, their special intervention and restraint equipment, etc.
Manuela Ştefănescu Diana Călinescu Valerian Stan