State does not, in this communication, express an opinion regarding the admissibility of the instant petition. 34. The State’s response of July 5, 2005, also regarding the precautionary measures, does indicate that the State has adopted certain measures to implement the precautionary measures in force. The State also asserts that “it believes it is appropriate to reaffirm its willingness to keep the channels for dialogue open with the petitioners as well as the provincial Government” with respect to the precautionary measures. IV. ANALYSIS A. The Inter-American Commission’s competence ratione ratione materiae, ratione temporis, and ratione loci personae, 35. The petitioners are entitled to bring petitions before the IACHR pursuant to Article 44 of the American Convention. These petitions identify as the alleged victims individual persons, Iván Torres and his family, with respect to whom the State has undertaken to respect and ensure the rights enshrined in the Convention. As for the State, the IACHR observes that Argentina is State party to the American Convention, having ratified it on September 5, 1984. Moreover, the IACHR observes that with respect to its passive competence in ratione personae, it is a general principle of international law that the State must answer for the acts of all of its organs, including those pertaining to the Judiciary. Therefore, the IACHR is competent to examine the instant position. 36. The IACHR is competent ratione loci to take up the petition insofar as it claims violations of rights protected by the American Convention, which allegedly occurred within the territory of a State party to that treaty. The IACHR is competent ratione temporis, inasmuch as the obligation to respect and ensure the rights established in the Convention was in force for the State when the events described in the petition allegedly occurred. With regard to the claims of possible violations of the InterAmerican Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons, the IACHR observes that Argentina ratified that Convention on February 28, 1996 and that it entered into effect on March 28, 1996. Therefore, this international instrument was in force for Argentina when the events described in the instant petition allegedly occurred. Finally, the IACHR is competent ratione materiae because the petition claims violations of human rights protected by the American Convention and by the Inter-American Convention on the Forced Disappearance of Persons. Further, pursuant to its ratification of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture on March 31, 1989, those obligations also apply. B. Other admissibility requirements 1. Exhaustion of domestic remedies 37. Under Article 46(1)(a) of the American Convention, the admission of a particular petition requires that “...the remedies under domestic law have been pursued and