2 5. On September 24, 1990, in response to the Commission’s Report 43/90, the Government transmitted to the Commission a report with three attachments. In the aforementioned report, the Government of Peru requested that Commission set aside Report 43/90, due to the lack of jurisdiction of Commission. (This fact has already been evaluated and is addressed in point IV. the preceding vote, which finds the objection of lack of jurisdiction of Commission to be well-founded.) 6. At Meeting 1085 Commission “decided to obligatory jurisdiction of because it considered the the the 7 of the of October 5, 1990, held during its 78th Session, the reconfirm its original decision to submit the case to the the Court” (page 21 of the Preliminary Objections file) Government’s reply to be unsatisfactory. 7. On October 10, 1990, the Commission submitted Case 10.078 to the Court. II. Normative Provisions 1. The Convention CHAPTER VII-THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS [. . .] Section 4. Procedure [. . .] Article 51 1. If, within a period of three months from the date of the transmittal of the report of the Commission to the states concerned, the matter has not either been settled or submitted by the Commission or by the state concerned to the Court and its jurisdiction accepted, the Commission may, by the vote of an absolute majority of its members, set forth its opinion and conclusions concerning the question submitted for its consideration. [. . .] 2. Statute of the Commission IV. FUNCTIONS AND POWERS Article 19 With respect to the States Parties to the American Convention on Human Rights, the Commission shall discharge its duties in