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.