99 k) The penitentiary system established by the anti-terrorist laws restricted the visits to the direct next of kin, which constitutes not only a violation of Article 5(3) of the Convention, but also of Article 17 thereof. Arguments of the State 238. The State has not filed any arguments regarding Articles 11, 13, and 17 of the Convention. Considerations of the Court 239. Article 11 of the Convention states the following: 1. Everyone has the right to have his honor respected and his dignity recognized. 2. No one may be the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, his home, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation. 3. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 240. Article 13 of the Convention states the following: 1. Everyone has the right to freedom of thought and expression. This right includes freedom to seek, receive, and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing, in print, in the form of art, or through any other medium of one's choice. [...] 241 Article 17 of the Convention states the following: 1. The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the state. [...] 242. The Court states that the arguments related to the alleged violation of Article 11 of the Convention to the detriment of Wilson García-Asto and Urcesino RamírezRojas and their next of kin refer to the facts related to the arbitrary detention that they suffered, their subsequent prosecution and conviction in a trial which did not guarantee a due process of law, and to the incarceration conditions that they had to endure in the different penitentiaries where they were detained. The Court considers that, in the instant case, the legal consequences of said facts have already been examined in relation to Articles 5, 7, and 8 of the Convention, and therefore the Court considers that it is not necessary to make a decision in that respect. 243. As to the allegation filed by the representatives regarding the alleged violation of Article 11 of the Convention, regarding Article 13 thereof, to the detriment of Urcesino Ramírez-Rojas, the Court considers that the facts of the case are not contemplated within the scope of such Articles.