The applicant, Mr. Ciorap, was accused of fraud detained on remand. During his family visits he could communicate with them only through a glass partition using an internal telephone. Such visits were limited to about two hours a month and the five cabins for such visits were placed close next to each other.
Mr. Ciorap complained that his right to meet his relatives and girlfriend had been restricted as he could have no physical contact with them and other prisoners were able to hear his conversations.
The Court emphasized that the prison authorities must assist prisoners in maintaining contact with their close family. The Court noted that while there may well be cases where restrictions on detainee\'s contacts with the outside world could be necessary, this was not so in the present case. The Court took into account that applicable prison rules which could serve as legal basis for putting up the glass partition gave very wide discretion to the remand center authorities and were not published and available to the applicant. The authorities also hadn’t shown any specific reasons or danger justifying the need for glass partition during the applicant’s family visits, especially because the applicant was convicted for fraud. Thus, finding that the measure applied was not necessary in democratic society, the Court ruled that there has been a violation of the applicant’s right to private and family life.