MÓŁKA v. POLAND DECISION 11 THE LAW A. Alleged violation of Article 6 of the Convention The applicant complained under Article 6 of the Convention about the unfairness of the court proceedings. Article 6, in so far as relevant, provides: “1. In the determination of his civil rights and obligations ..., everyone is entitled to a fair and public hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial tribunal established by law.” The Court notes that the impugned court proceedings involved the determination of the electoral complaint lodged by the applicant, in which he protested about having been deprived of his right to vote in the local elections. The Court considers that the dispute in question determined the applicant’s political rights, not his “civil” rights within the meaning of Article 6 of the Convention (see, in the context of local elections, Cherepkov v. Russia (dec.), no. 51501/99, ECHR 2000-I, and, in the context of parliamentary elections, Pierre-Bloch v. France, judgment of 21 October 1997, Reports of Judgments and Decisions 1997-VI, p. 2223, § 50). Accordingly, Article 6 does not apply in the present case. It follows that this part of the application is incompatible ratione materiae with the provisions of the Convention within the meaning of Article 35 § 3 and must be rejected in accordance with Article 35 § 4. B. Alleged violation of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention The applicant further alleged a breach of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention, 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.” 1. The Government’s submissions The Government stressed that Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the Convention applied only as far as elections to legislatures were concerned. In their view, the municipal councils (rady gmin), the district councils (rady powiatów) and the regional assemblies (sejmiki województw) could not be considered “legislatures” within the meaning of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1. The Government emphasised that the issue of the applicability of Article 3 of Protocol No. 1 to the election of local government organs had already been examined by the European Commission of Human Rights. They referred, inter alia, to the case of X. the United Kingdom (no. 5155/71, Commission decision of 12 July 1976 DR 6, p. 13) in which, considering