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 report drawn up by the European
Commission of Human Rights in accordance with Article 31 (art. 31)
of the Convention relating to the application lodged on
9 January 1990 by Mr W. against the United Kingdom
(Application No. 16244/90);
Whereas on 14 June 1993 the Commission transmitted the said
report 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 case having been brought
before the European Court of Human Rights in pursuance of
Article 48 (art. 48) of the Convention;
Whereas in his application, as declared admissible by the
Commission on 12 October 1992 (final decision as to the
admissibility), the applicant complained of the interception of two
of his letters by the prison authorities and of the absence of an
effective remedy;
Whereas in its report adopted on 4 May 1993, the Commission
expressed unanimously the opinion that there had been a violation
of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention in respect of the letter of
27 October 1988, by nine votes to eight that there had been no
violation of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention in respect of the
letter of 3 February 1989 and by fifteen votes to seven that there
had been no violation of Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;
Whereas, at the 499th meeting of the Ministers' Deputies, held
on 15 October 1993, the Committee of Ministers, agreeing with the
opinion expressed by the Commission, held, having voted in
accordance with the provisions of Article 32, paragraph 1
(art. 32-1), of the Convention, that there had been in this case a
violation of Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention as regards the
letter of 27 October 1988, that there had been no violation of
Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention as regards the letter
of 3 February 1989 and that there had been no violation of
Article 13 (art. 13) of the Convention;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers examined the proposals made
by the Commission when transmitting its report as regards just
satisfaction to be awarded to the applicant, proposals supplemented
by a letter of the President of the Commission dated 15 April 1994;
Whereas, at the 514th meeting of the Deputies, held on
9 June 1994, the Committee of Ministers decided, in accordance with
Article 32, paragraph 2 (art. 32-2), of the Convention, that the
Government of the United Kingdom was to pay the applicant as just
satisfaction, within three months, 1 158 pounds sterling in respect
of costs and expenses;
Whereas, at the 517th meeting of the Deputies, held
on 20 September 1994, the Committee of Ministers decided, in
accordance with Article 32, paragraph 2 (art. 32-2), of the
Convention, that the Government of the United Kingdom was to pay
the applicant as just satisfaction, within three months,
100 pounds sterling in respect of non-pecuniary damage;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers invited the Government of
the United Kingdom to inform it of the measures taken following its
decisions of 15 October 1993, 9 June 1994 and 20 September 1994,
having regard to the United Kingdom's obligation under Article 32,
paragraph 4 (art. 32-4), of the Convention to abide by them;
Whereas the Committee of Ministers satisfied itself that
on 26 January 1995 the Government of the United Kingdom paid the
applicant the total sum of 1 258 pounds sterling as just
satisfaction,
Declares, having taken note of the measures taken by the
Government of the United Kingdom, that it has exercised its
functions under Article 32 (art. 32) of the Convention in this
case;
Authorises the publication of the report adopted by the
Commission in this case.
Full & Egal Universal Law Academy