Tokens: 19
.
Clearly
,
it
would
be
futile
to
discuss
whether
or
not
Article
6.1
(
art
.
6
-
1
)
of
the
Convention
afforded
a
right
of
access
to
the
English
courts
unless
Golder
had
in
fact
been
denied
such
access
,
-
and
in
my
opinion
he
had
not
.
He
had
,
in
the
manner
already
described
,
been
prevented
from
consulting
a
solicitor
with
a
view
-
possibly
–
to
having
recourse
to
those
courts
;
but
this
was
not
in
itself
a
denial
of
access
to
them
,
and
could
not
be
since
the
Home
Secretary
and
the
prison
authorities
had
no
power
de
jure
to
forbid
it
.
It
might
nevertheless
be
prepared
to
hold
,
as
the
Court
evidently
does
,
that
there
had
been
a
"
constructive
"
denial
if
,
de
facto
,
the
act
of
refusing
to
allow
Golder
to
consult
a
solicitor
had
had
the
effect
of
permanently
and
finally
cutting
him
off
from
all
chances
of
recourse
to
the
courts
for
the
purpose
of
the
proceedings
he
wanted
to
bring
.
But
this
was
not
the
case
:
he
would
still
have
been
in
time
to
act
even
if
he
had
served
his
full
term
,
which
he
did
not
do
,
being
soon
released
on
parole
.
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