Final Resolution ResDH(2006)57 concerning the judgment of the European Court of Human Rights of 18 February 1999 (Grand Chamber) in the case of Matthews against the United Kingdom

(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 2 November 2006, at the 976th meeting of the Ministers ' Deputies)

The Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention for the P rotection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (hereinafter referred to as “the Convention”),

Having regard to the final judgment of the European Court of Human Rights in the Matthews case delivered on 18 February 1999 and transmitted the same day to the Committee of Ministers under Article 46 of the Convention;

Recalling that the case originated in an application (No. 24833/94) against the United Kingdom, lodged with the European Commission of Human Rights on 18 April 1994 under former Article 25 of the Co n vention by Ms Denise Matthews , a British national, and that the Commission declared admissible the complaint concerning the absence of elections to the European P arliament in Gibraltar ;

Recalling that the case was brought before the Court by the Commission, on 26 January 1998;

Whereas in its judgment of 18 February 1999 the Court:

- held, by fifteen votes to two, that there had been a breach of Article 3 of P rotocol No. 1 to the Convention;

- held, unanimously, that it was not necessary to consider the complaint under Article 14 of the Convention taken together with Article 3 of P rotocol No. 1 to the Convention ;

- held, unanimously, that the government of the respondent state was to pay the applicant, within three months, for costs and expenses, 45 000 pounds sterling plus any value added tax which might be due, less 18 510 French Francs to be converted into pounds sterling at the rate applicable on the date of delivery of the judgment and that simple interest at an annual rate of 7.5% would be payable on this sum from the expiry of the above-mentioned three months until settlement;

- dismissed, unanimously, the remainder of the applicant ' s claim for just satisfa c tion;

Having regard to the Rules adopted by the Committee of Ministers concerning the application of Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention;

Having invited the government of the respondent state to inform it of the mea s ures which had been taken in consequence of the judgment of 18 February 1999, having regard to the United Kingdom ' s legal obligation under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Conve n tion to abide by it;

Whereas during the examination of the case by the Committee of Ministers, the government of the respondent state gave the Committee information about the measures taken preventing new violations of the same kind as that found in the present judgment and providing redress, as far as possible, to the applicant; this information appears in the appendix to this resolution;

Recalling its interim resolution ResDH(2001)79 adopted on 26 June 2001;

Having satisfied itself that on 17 May 1999, within the time-limit set, the government of the respondent state had paid the a p plicant the sum provided in the judgment of 18 February 1999,

Declares, after having examined the information supplied by the Government of the United Kingdom , that it has exe r cised its functions under Article 46, paragraph 2, of the Convention in this case.

Appendix to Resolution ResDH(2006)57

Information provided by the Government of the United Kingdom during the examination of the Matthews case

by the Committee of Ministers

The solution chosen

Under European Community (EC) law, elections to the European P arliament are governed by the EC Act on Direct Elections of 1976 (EC Act 1976). Annex II to this Act states that “The United Kingdom will apply the provisions of this Act only in respect of the United Kingdom ”. Gibraltar forms part of Her Majesty the Queen ' s dominions, but is not part of the United Kingdom . For this reason, when provision was originally made in the UK for European P arliamentary elections (by the European P arliamentary Elections Act of 1978), Gibraltar was not included.

Following the judgment of the European Court in the present case, the United Kingdom tabled an amendment to the EC Act 1976 in March 1999, but were unable to secure the unanimous agreement of the Council of the European Union.

In response of the adoption, in June 2001, of Interim Resolution ResDH(2001)79 by the Committee of Ministers, urging the United Kingdom to take the necessary measures to secure the rights under Article 3 of P rotocol No. 1 in respect of elections to the European P arliament in Gibraltar, the government announced that the United Kingdom would act unilaterally to enfranchise the Gibraltar electorate by means of United Kingdom domestic legislation.

The legislative reform

The United Kingdom P arliament adopted the European P arliament (Representation) Act which received the Royal Assent on 8 May 2003. This Act provided for the entirety of UK electoral law, as it applied to European P arliamentary elections, to be applied to Gibraltar for those purposes. P ursuant to its provisions, Gibraltar was to be combined with an existing electoral region in England and Wales to form a new electoral region (“the combined region”) for the purposes of European P arliamentary elections taking place after 1 April 2004.

The European P arliamentary Elections (Combined Region and Campaign Expenditure) ( United Kingdom and Gibraltar) Order of 2004 approved by the United Kingdom P arliament included Gibraltar in the constituency of the South West region.

It should be noted that the compatibility of the European P arliament (Representation) Act 2003 with European Union law was questioned before the European Commission, because this act grants franchise to persons who are not nationals of the UK and hence not EU citizens, and because it creates a “combined electoral region” incorporating Gibraltar into an existing electoral region in England and Wales. On 29 October 2003 the Commission declared that the United Kingdom had organised the extension of voting rights to residents in Gibraltar within the framework of the margin of discretion presently given to member states by EU law. However the Commission did not adopt a reasoned opinion within the meaning of Article 227 (action for non-fulfilment of an obligation) of the Treaty Establishing the European Community.

The 2004 elections to the European P arliament

On 10 June 2004 the citizens of Gibraltar took part for the first time in elections to the European P arliament with a turnout of 57.54%. The combined region South West and Gibraltar elected 7 members of the European P arliament.

P ublication

The case has received extensive newspaper coverage and the judgment of the European Court has been published, in particular in the European Human Rights Report , Human Rights Case Digest and other legal journals.

Individual measures

Considering the nature of the violation found and the Court ' s judgment under Article 41 of the Convention, the question of individual measures appears absorbed by that of general measures.

Conclusion

In view of the foregoing, the Government of the United Kingdom considers that the violation of Article 3 of P rotocol No. 1 to the Convention found by the European Court in the present case has been fully remedied and that the United Kingdom has therefore complied with its obligations under Article 46, paragraph 1, of the Convention.