MATTHEWS v. THE UNITED KINGDOM JUDGMENT 10 PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE COMMISSION 20. Ms Matthews applied to the Commission on 18 April 1994. She alleged a violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1, taken alone or in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention. 21. The Commission declared the application (no. 24833/94) admissible on 16 April 1996. In its report of 29 October 1997 (former Article 31 of the Convention), it expressed the opinion that there had been no violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 (eleven votes to six) and that there had been no violation of Article 14 of the Convention (twelve votes to five). The full text of the Commission’s opinion and of the five separate opinions contained in the report is reproduced as an annex to this judgment1. FINAL SUBMISSIONS TO THE COURT 22. The Government asked the Court to find that there had been no violation of the Convention. 23. The applicant, for her part, asked the Court to find a breach of her rights under Article 3 of Protocol No. 1, taken alone or in conjunction with Article 14 of the Convention. She also claimed an award of costs. THE LAW I. ALLEGED VIOLATION OF ARTICLE 3 OF PROTOCOL No. 1 24. The applicant alleged a breach of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1, which provides: “The High Contracting Parties undertake to hold free elections at reasonable intervals by secret ballot, under conditions which will ensure the free expression of the opinion of the people in the choice of the legislature.” 25. The Government maintained that, for three main reasons, Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 was not applicable to the facts of the present case or, in the alternative, that there had been no violation of that provision. 1. Note by the Registry. For practical reasons this annex will appear only with the final printed version of the judgment (in the official reports of selected judgments and decisions of the Court), but a copy of the Commission’s report is obtainable from the Registry.