Tokens: 2
.
It
is
clear
from
the
Court
’s
established
case
-
law
that
conditions
of
detention
are
an
important
factor
for
the
lawfulness
of
detention
.
Thus
the
Court
has
found
on
several
occasions
that
detention
ordered
“
in
accordance
with
a
procedure
prescribed
by
law
”
may
prove
incompatible
with
Article
5
§
(
1
)
of
the
Convention
if
the
conditions
of
detention
are
(
or
become
)
inappropriate
(
see
,
among
many
other
authorities
,
the
leading
judgment
in
the
case
of
Bouamar
v.
Belgium
,
29
February
1988
,
Series
A
no
.
129
)
.
That
was
explicitly
acknowledged
by
the
respondent
Government
in
the
present
case
in
its
unilateral
declaration
concerning
the
period
between
3
August
2012
,
when
the
Regional
Court
adopted
its
judgment
,
and
20
June
2013
.
The
contrary
proposition
–
that
is
to
say
a
finding
that
unlawful
detention
has
become
lawful
because
of
a
substantial
improvement
in
the
conditions
of
detention
–
is
,
on
the
face
of
it
,
more
difficult
to
accept
.
However
,
the
arguments
set
out
in
paragraphs
162
-
169
of
the
judgment
in
particular
convinced
me
that
the
applicant
’s
detention
during
the
period
in
issue
had
been
justified
under
Article
5
(
1
)
(
e
)
of
the
Convention
.
Labels: O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O