indefinite basis. In that respect, the IACHR finds that the arguments refer not to access to public service in the terms of the aforementioned provision in the Convention, but to the right to remain therein.11 The Inter-American Commission finds that the arguments put forward by the petitioners do not tend to establish a possible violation of Article 23 of the American Convention. 41. Finally, the petitioners alleged violation of Article 24 of the Convention because they consider that the justices were treated in a discriminatory manner based on the government’s perception of their political affiliations. Beyond the mere affirmation of the petitioners, the Commission finds no evidence by which to show in the stage on merits that any discrimination existed. 42. Based on the foregoing, the Inter-American Commission finds that the arguments refer to alleged violations of the rights to a fair trial and judicial protection enshrined in Articles 8, 9 and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with the general obligations to observe and ensure rights set down in Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same international instrument. On the other hand, the allegations do not tend to establish possible violations of the rights protected in articles 23 or 24 of the American Convention. V. CONCLUSIONS 43. The Inter-American Commission concludes that the instant case is admissible and that it is competent to take up the petition lodged by the petitioners in respect of the alleged violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1 (1) thereof. Conversely, it concludes that the allegations of the petitioners, if proven, would not constitute possible violations of Articles 9, 23, or 24 of the American Convention. 44. Based on the factual and legal arguments given above and without prejudging the merits of the matter, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 1. To declare the petition under review admissible with regard to the rights recognized in Articles 8, 9, and 25 of the American Convention in connection with Article 1(1) of said instrument. 2. To declare inadmissible the arguments concerning Articles 23 and 24 of the American Convention. 3. To invite the parties to consider the possibility of initiating a procedure with a view to reaching a friendly settlement of the case and to place itself at their disposal for that purpose. 4. To notify the State and the petitioners of this decision. 5. To publish this decision and include it in its Annual Report to be presented to the General Assembly of the OAS. Done and signed by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, D.C., on the 27th day of the month of Februay, 2007. (Signed) Florentín Meléndez, President; Paolo Carozza, First Vice-President; Víctor E. Abramovich, Second Vice-President, Sir Clare K. Roberts, Evelio Fernández Arévalos, Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, and Freddy Gutiérrez, Commissioners. 11 See, in this respect, I/A Court H.R., Constitutional Court Case. Judgment of January 31, 2001, para. 103. 10