CEDH · CASELAW;RESOLUTIONS;MERITS;ENG — 27 juin 1986

.sDD6737AE { font-size:11pt } .s211D6B00 { margin-top:0pt; margin-bottom:0pt; line-height:normal; widows:0; orphans:0; font-size:8.5pt } .sBB9EE52A { font-family:Arial }  The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as "the convention"),   Having regard to the reports drawn up by the European Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31) of the convention relating to the applications lodged by Mr Ian Brady, Mr Arthur Hosein, Lord Avebury, Mr Steven Raymond, Mr Joseph Stewart, Mr Anthony Slade and Mr Henry McQueenie against the United Kingdom (Nos. 8575/79, 9086/80, 9257/81, 9282/81, 9422/81, 9428/81 and 9917/82);   Whereas on 27 September 1985 the Commission transmitted the said reports to the Committee of Ministers and whereas the period of three months provided for in Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention has elapsed without the cases having been brought before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of Article 48 (art. 48) of the convention;   Whereas in their applications introduced between 16 January 1979 and 9 March 1982, the applicants complained of the censorship of their correspondence by the British prison authorities and alleged breaches of Article 8 (art. 8) of the convention, Mr Raymond also complaining of the denial of access to court, contrary to Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the convention;   Whereas the Commission declared the applications admissible on 4 March 1985 and in its reports adopted on 2 July 1985 it expressed the opinion that there had been breaches of Article 8 (art. 8) of the convention by unanimous votes in each case, and that there had been a breach of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), of the convention in Mr Raymond's case;   Agreeing with the opinion expressed by the Commission in accordance with Article 31, paragraph 1 (art. 31-1), of the convention;   Whereas during the examination of these cases the Government of the United Kingdom informed the Committee of Ministers that it accepted the opinions expressed by the Commission in its reports;   Whereas the Commission has stated that the merits of these applications resemble the test case of "Silver and others" and whereas in its Resolution DH (85) 15 in the "Silver and others" case the Committee was informed by the Government of the United Kingdom of the measures taken in consequence of the judgment of the Court, which information was summarised in the appendix to that resolution;   Voting in accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1 (art. 32-1), of the convention;   a. Decides:   i.   that there has been a violation of Article 8 (art. 8) of the convention in these cases;   ii. that there has been a violation of Article 6, paragraph 1 (art. 6-1), in the case of Mr Raymond;   b. Decides that no further action is called for in these cases.