4 18. The State also claims that the complaint lodged before the Inter-American Commission has become futile, since as of August 2009 the following alleged victims have been released: Cristian Eduardo Crespo, Julio Eduardo Gómez, Néstor Rolando López, Néstor Zacarías Pardo, Hugo Alberto Blanco and Miguel Ángel González Mendoza. 19. Regarding José Heriberto Muñoz Zabala, the State reports that he is a Chilean national and therefore would never have received any visits, whether in Neuquén or in any of the other locations where he has been held; as of August 2009 he was in Unit No. 7 (Province of Chaco). Regarding Juan Pablo Lucero, as of August 2009 he was held in Unit No. 6 of Rawson (Province of Chubut); he is visited by his mother and has not requested a transfer to the Province of Neuquén. Both Muñoz Zabala and Lucero are in the trust stage [fase de confianza], the last one in the gradual release program. IV. ANALYSIS REGARDING COMPETENCE AND ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence 20. The petitioners have standing, in principle, pursuant to article 44 of the American Convention to submit petitions before the Commission. The petition names individual persons as alleged victims, with respect to whom the Argentine State undertook to respect and guarantee the rights provided for by the American Convention. Regarding the State, the Commission notes that Argentina is a StateParty to the American convention since May 9, 1984, the date upon which it deposited its instrument of ratification. Therefore, the Commission is competent ratione personae to examine the petition. Likewise, the Commission is competent ratione loci to take cognizance of the petition, because it alleges the violation of rights protected by the American Convention which took place within the territory of the Argentine Republic, a State-Party to said treaty. 21. The Commission is competent ratione temporis because the obligation to respect and guarantee rights protected by the American Convention was in force for the State at the time when the facts in the petition allegedly occurred. Finally, the Commission is competent ratione materiae because the petition reports the possible violation of human rights protected by the American Convention. B. Exhaustion of domestic remedies 22. Article 46(1)(a) of the American Convention requires the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies in accordance with generally recognized principles of international law, for the admission of a petition regarding an alleged infringement of the American Convention. The purpose of this requirement is to allow national authorities to take cognizance of an alleged violation of a protected right and, if appropriate, to provide a remedy before the case is heard in an international venue. 23. In the instant case, the State argues, in general terms, that in the petitioners’ complaint there is no record of any attempt on their part to initiate legal action to protect the rights alleged to have been infringed. 24. It is then up to the Commission to establish whether the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies has been met by each one of the alleged victims. In this respect, the following can be inferred from the case file: a. Néstor Rolando López: the Second Criminal Chamber of the city of Neuquén issued a decision on February 11, 1997 in which it denied a request from Mr. López for his prompt return to Unit No. 9 of Neuquén. Mr. López’s defense lawyer filed a cassation appeal against this decision, which was dismissed by the Superior Court of Neuquén in its Judgment No. 67/1997. An extraordinary federal appeal [recurso extraordinario federal] was filed against this last ruling, which was again denied by the same Superior Court of Justice in its Interlocutory Decision No. 74 of April 21, 1998. In response to this ruling, the defense submitted a motion for admission of a denied appeal [recurso de hecho] before the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation which, on August 6, 1998, was also dismissed.