23
SILVER AND OTHERS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUGDMENT
restrictions on the contents of letters to Consular officials (see paragraph 45
(c) above).
Mr. Cooper’s letters nos. 19, 21 and 25, all addressed to relatives, were
stopped on grounds of the general control of "objectionable" letters under
Rule 33(3) but without an official explanation being given. The
Commission observed that the authority for this action was not clear,
beyond the general discretion under the said Rule.
PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION
72. Mr. Silver, Mr. Noe, Mrs. Colne, Mr. Tuttle, Mr. Cooper, Mr.
McMahon and Mr. Carne applied to the Commission on 20 November
1972, 1 February 1973, 2 June 1975, 20 March 1975, 28 October 1974, 8
July 1975 and 5 April 1975, respectively. They alleged that the control of
their correspondence by the prison authorities had given rise to violations of
Articles 8 and 10 (art. 8, art. 10) of the Convention. Mr. Silver also asserted
that the refusal of two petitions to the Home Secretary seeking permission
to obtain legal advice constituted a denial of his right of access to the courts,
guaranteed by Article 6 § 1 (art. 6-1).
On 5 March 1976, 19 December 1975 and 4 October 1977, respectively,
the Commission declared inadmissible the applications of Mr. Silver, Mr.
Noe and Mr. Cooper in so far as they contained certain additional
complaints. On the last-mentioned date, it declared admissible the
remainder of those applications and the whole of the other four; previously,
on 11 March 1977, it had ordered the joinder of the seven applications in
pursuance of Rule 29 of its Rules of Procedure. Subsequently, each
applicant also contended that there had been breach of Article 13 (art. 13)
on account of the absence of an effective remedy before a national authority
in respect of the alleged violations of his or her Convention rights.
73. On 3 April 1979, Mr. Silver’s legal representative notified the
Commission of his client’s death. In view of the wishes, expressed by Mr.
Silver’s next of kin, to continue the case and of the issues of general interest
raised, the Commission decided on 8 May 1979 to retain the application.
Although the next of kin are today to be regarded as having the status of
"applicants" (see the Deweer judgment of 27 February 1980, Series A no.
35, pp. 19-20, § 37), for the sake of convenience the present judgment will
continue to refer to Mr. Silver as an "applicant".
74. In its report of 11 October 1980 (Article 31 of the Convention) (art.
31), the Commission expressed the opinion:
- by a series of votes (with one exception unanimous), that, save in
respect of six letters (namely, Mr. Silver’s letter no. 7, Mr. Cooper’s letters
nos. 28-31 and Mr. Noe’s letter no. 12), the censorship of the applicants’