Background
D.T., a Greek national with bipolar disorder and drug addiction, was held in Korydallos Prison from 19 March 2021 until 18 April 2022 while in pre-trial detention. His medical history included psychiatric hospitalisations, a disability assessment, and a treating psychiatrist’s opinion that his serious chronic disorder required medication without interruption and regular psychiatric monitoring.
The prison authorities knew of his condition and prescribed medication. The record showed, however, only one psychiatric consultation during his approximately fourteen months at Korydallos Prison, on 18 February 2022, following an initial assessment at a different facility in December 2020. D.T. complained that the psychiatric monitoring and medication provided in detention were inadequate and that he lacked an effective domestic remedy.
The Court’s Holding
The Court unanimously held that Greece violated Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights by failing to provide adequate psychiatric monitoring. D.T.’s medical evidence established that regular monitoring was necessary, but the Government did not demonstrate that it occurred. His medical file contained no schedule of consultations, no meaningful account of the February 2022 examination, and no comprehensive record showing a therapeutic strategy or follow-up care. Given his vulnerability and serious mental-health disorder, the deficiency amounted to inhuman or degrading treatment. Having reached that conclusion, the Court did not separately examine his allegation that his medication was inadequate.
The Court found no violation of Article 13. A complaint to the prison council, followed after rejection by an appeal to the court for the execution of sentences under Articles 6 and 86 of the Penal Code, was in principle an effective remedy available to D.T. His mental condition had not been shown to prevent its use. By contrast, a complaint to the supervising prosecutor under Article 567 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was not effective because judicial review was not shown to be available in practice, the prosecutor participated in prison administration, and the procedure did not produce a binding decision enforceable by the prisoner.
The Court awarded D.T. EUR 12,500 for non-pecuniary damage and EUR 2,500 for costs and expenses.
Key Takeaways
- For a prisoner with a serious mental-health disorder, diagnosis and medication alone do not satisfy Article 3 when the condition also requires regular, systematic psychiatric monitoring.
- Incomplete medical records can prevent a government from demonstrating that adequate monitoring and a comprehensive treatment strategy were provided.
- Greek prisoners may use the prison-council and execution-court procedure to challenge individual deficiencies in medical care, but a complaint to the supervising prosecutor alone is not an effective remedy for that purpose.
Why It Matters
The judgment reinforces that prison mental-healthcare must meet the standards imposed by Article 3 of the European Convention on Human Rights. Authorities must provide care compatible with human dignity, including regular and systematic supervision when medically required, and must maintain records capable of showing what care was delivered and why.
The decision also clarifies the available Greek remedies for individual detention complaints: the prison-council procedure with judicial appeal remains effective in principle, while prosecutorial supervision without a demonstrated avenue of judicial review does not.