CH/02/12470 violation of his rights under Article 25(b) of the ICCPR, that part of the application is incompatible ratione materiae with the Agreement and thus inadmissible. (b) Article 3 of the First Protocol to the Convention 114. Exercising its jurisdiction to consider “apparent violations” of the rights protected by the Agreement in addition to violations alleged by the applicant, as set forth in Article II(2) of the Agreement, the Chamber has, however, transmitted the complaint relating to the right to run for elections also under Article 3 of the First Protocol to the Convention, which is applicable in the absence of discrimination as well. It will now consider issues relating to the admissibility of the application in this part. 115. The Chamber first observes that the complaint related to the right to run for elections involves the Election Law, the Election Commission, and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which invokes the responsibility of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnia and Herzegovina has not objected to the admissibility of the application on any grounds. However, the OHR, in its amicus curiae submission received on 4 July 2003, states that, “…the actions giving rise to the present application cannot be considered to be within the scope of responsibility of the respondent Party.” The Chamber will therefore address whether the applicant’s complaint in connection with the right to run for elections invokes the responsibility of Bosnia and Herzegovina. 116. In this regard, the Chamber recalls that Annex 3 to the General Framework Agreement, entitled “Agreement on Elections”, authorised the OSCE to organise and run the elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina, including establishing a Provisional Election Commission. Annex 3 was considered an interim measure until the conditions were present for national authorities to supervise and run the elections, including establishing a Permanent Election Commission. In August 2001, the Election Law was adopted which provided for the national authorities to administer the elections. The members of the Election Commission were appointed in November 2001 and it held its first session on 20 November 2001. From that point on, the Provisional Election Commission, and the OSCE’s supervisory role in the elections, ceased. 117. The OHR in its amicus curiae submission, refers to the Chamber’s decision of 14 May 1998 in case nos. CH/98/230 and 231 Suljanovi}, ^i{i} and Leli} v. Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Republika Srpska (Decisions and Reports 1998) where the Chamber found that the Parties to the General Framework Agreement agreed to the intervention of OSCE under Annex 3 to manage the elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Specifically, the acts complained of in those applications involved the OSCE, the Provisional Election Commission and the Election Appeals Sub-Commission, and therefore the applications were found not to be within the Chamber’s competence ratione personae. However, the Chamber differentiates the application at hand as the actions complained of occurred when the Election Law was in place and the domestic authorities were responsible for the administration of the elections, and not the OSCE. 118. The OHR also recalls the Chamber’s decision of 18 December 1998 in case no. CH/98/1266, ^avi} v. Bosnia and Herzegovina, (Decisions and Reports 1998), where the Chamber found, that “Article II(2) of the Agreement gives the Chamber competence to consider, inter alia, alleged or apparent violations of human rights for which it is alleged or apparent that the Parties are responsible. It does not provide for the possibility of the Chamber considering applications directed against the High Representative. As the Chamber has previously stated, it is beyond doubt that the actions of the High Representative are not subject to any review in relation to the carrying out of his functions under the General Framework Agreement. For this to be the case, the General Framework Agreement would have to provide specifically for any such review…” (^avi}, paragraph 18) 119. The Chamber also found in the ^avi} decision, that 19