5 24. In Resolution 22/86 of April 18, 1986, adopted at its 67th Session, the Commission deemed the new information presented by the Government insufficient to warrant reconsideration of Resolution 30/83 and found, to the contrary, that "all evidence shows that Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez is still missing and that the Government of Honduras . . . has not offered convincing proof that would allow the Commission to determine that the allegations are not true." In that same Resolution, the Commission confirmed Resolution 30/83, denied the request for reconsideration and referred the matter to the Court. III 25. In its submissions of October 31, 1986, the Government concluded that: 1. The Commission did not follow the procedure established for the admissibility of a petition or communication. 2. The Commission did not take into account the information provided by the Government regarding the failure to exhaust the domestic legal remedies. 3. Domestic legal remedies were neither pursued nor exhausted. 4. The Commission did not follow the procedure established for preparation of reports. 5. The Commission ignored the Convention's provision regarding friendly settlement. 6. The procedures established in Articles 48 - 50 of the Convention for referral of a case to the Court pursuant to Article 61 of the Convention were not complied with. 7. Observations by the Government on the merits are not appropriate at this stage of the proceedings. 26. In its observations of March 20, 1987, on the submissions of the Government, the Commission concluded that: 1. Officials or agents of the Government of Honduras detained Angel Manfredo Velásquez Rodríguez on September 12, 1981, and he has been missing since that date. This constitutes a most serious violation of the rights to life, to humane treatment and to personal liberty, which are guaranteed by Articles 4, 5 and 7 of the American Convention on Human Rights, to which Honduras is a State Party; 2. The substantive or procedural objections raised by the Government of Honduras in its Memorial have no legal basis under the provisions of the relevant articles of the American Convention on Human Rights and the standards of international law; and 3. Since Honduras has recognized the compulsory jurisdiction of the InterAmerican Court of Human Rights, the Commission again petitions the Honorable Court, pursuant to Article 63 (1) of the American Convention on Human Rights, to