PARTLY DISSENTING OPINION OF

MM. S. TRECHSEL, F. MARTINEZ AND N. BRATZA

AS REGARDS ARTICLE 8 OF THE CONVENTION

     While we have voted in favour of a violation of Article 6 in the

present cases for the reasons given in the Commission's report, we are

unable to share the view of the majority of the Commission that there has

been a separate breach of Article 8 of the Convention.

     The essential complaint of the applicants concerns the non-

disclosure of relevant records and the consequent impact on their ability

to establish their claims for disability pensions.

     The only relevant records which it has been established existed and

continue to exist are not medical records or documents containing data

or information of a personal nature concerning the applicants or their

involvement in the test programme, but records of a more general

character concerning levels of radiation during and following the nuclear

detonations. There is nothing to indicate that the relevant records make

any specific reference to the applicants or to their participation in the

test programme.

     As the Commission has found, the failure to disclose the records

amounts to a denial of effective access to court within the meaning of

Article 6 para. 1 of the Convention. Having regard to this conclusion,

even assuming that the records may be said to relate to the private life

of the applicants, we have not found it necessary to reach a finding on

the question whether the non-disclosure of the same records also amounts

to a breach of the applicants' rights under Article 8 of the Convention.