The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Thursday stated in its judgment in the case of Dusan Ulemek versus Croatia that inadequate conditions in the Zagreb jail reached the level of "degrading treatment".

The court says in a press release that Ulemek, a Croatian national, who was given a prison sentence of 18 months for aiding and abetting robbery, complained in his application about the conditions of his detention in two prisons and of a lack of effective domestic remedies.

The applicant spent 27 days in Zagreb Prison in 2011 and the rest of his sentence in the Glina jail before being released on parole in September 2012.

He complained about the conditions of his detention in Glina Prison while still incarcerated.

Among other things, he alleged overcrowding, a lack of facilities, the poor organisation of activities, that he had been harassed by other prisoners, and that he had been kept isolated. His complaints were dismissed by the prison’s governor, a sentence-execution judge and the appeal court.

“On his release he began proceedings for compensation for the allegedly inadequate conditions of his detention in both prisons. His claim was rejected at first instance, on appeal and by the Constitutional Court,” reads the press release.

“Relying in particular on Article 3 (prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment) of the European Convention on Human Rights, the applicant complained about the conditions of his detention in both prisons.”

The Strasbourg-court ruled that there was violation of Article 3 (degrading treatment) – concerning the conditions of Mr Ulemek’s detention in Zagreb Prison.

It ruled that there was “no violation of Article 3 – concerning the conditions of Mr Ulemek’s detention in Glina State Prison”

Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights is about prohibition of inhuman or degrading treatment.

The applicant is entitled to an award of just satisfaction: 1,000 euros (non-pecuniary damage) and EUR 2,890 (costs and expenses).

The ruling is not final, and both sides can appeal against it before the Grand Chamber.

Ulemek’s lawyer Lidija Horvat told Hina on Thursday that the ruling was of great importance for rights of incarcerated persons.