8 30. The Inter-American Commission has reiterated that reasoning, for example w ith regard to the admissibility of petitions that refer to amnesty law s in Peru, in the follow ing terms: Regarding the alleged failure to investigate and punish the masterminds behind the La Cantuta massacre, the Commission notes that the trial in w hich certain individuals w ere convicted for the killings ended w ith a judgment by the Supreme Council of Military Justice on May 3, 1994. That judgment made no statement either convicting or acquitting those accu sed of having masterminded the massacre. Then, although a new investigation aimed at identifying the masterminds behind the incident could theoretically have been opened, Article 6 of Law No. 26479, in accordance w ith the terms of Article 3 of Law No. 2649 2, stipulates that the Peruvian courts are prohibited from beginning any such investigation. Thus, given that Peru’s internal legislation lacks an effective remedy for trying to determine the alleged responsibility of the masterminds, the exemption from the requirement of exhausting domestic law remedies, set forth in Article 46.2.a, applies. 8 31. Consequently, as it has ruled w ith respect to amnesty law s related to Argentina, Uruguay, and Peru, among others, the IACHR determines that this petition is admissible because Brazil’ s domestic law does not contemplate due process of law for the protection of the rights alleged to have been violated. The IACHR therefore applies to this petition the exception to the rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies established in Article 46.2.a of the American Convention. C. Timeliness of the petition 32. Article 46.1.b of the American Convention establishes that for a petition to be considered admissible by the IACHR it must be lodged w ithin a period of six months from the dat e on w hich the party alleging violation of rights w as notified of the final judgment. The IACHR has established, above, the application of the exception of exhaustion of domestic remedies under Article 46.2.a of the American Convention. In that regard, Art icle 32.2 of the Inter-American Commission’ s Rules of Procedure establishes that in those cases in w hich exceptions to the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies apply, the petition shall be presented w ithin a reasonable period of time, as determined by the IACHR. For this purpose, the Inter-American Commission should take into account the date on w hich the alleged violation of rights occurred and the circumstances of each case. 33. In the matter being examined, the IACHR observes that the alleged arbitrary detention, torture, and death of the alleged victim occurred on October 25, 1975. Nevertheless, the Inter-American Commission notes that the petition also claims that Law No. 6.683/79 is incompatible w ith the American Convention and alleges ongoing impunity w ith respect to the violations committed against the alleged victim, w hich presumably continue to this day by virtue of the existence of the Brazilian amnesty law . 34. In order to determine w hether the petition w as lodged w ithin a reasonable time period, the IACHR deems it pertinent to point out that although Law No. 6.683/79 w as enacted in 1979, it w as not until 1992 that there w as an attempt to criminally investigate the facts in this case. In fact, on May 4, 1992, Prosecutor Luiz Antonio Guimarães Marrey of the Public Prosecutor’ s Office decided to open a police investigation, based on new and supervening evidence, 9 specifically statements made by a retired military officer know n as “ Captain Ramiro,” w hich w ere published on March 25, 1992, in the magazine Isto É, Senhor. 10 How ever, on July 21, 1992, “ Captain Ramiro” 8 IACHR. Report No. 42/99, Admissibility, Petition 11.045, La Cantuta, Peru, March 11, 1999, para. 43 (emphasis ours). Along the same lines, see IACHR. Application to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights against the Republic of Peru, Case 11.528, Barrios Altos, para. 54, available at: http://w w w .corteidh.or.cr/docs/casos/barrios/demanda.PDF. 9 See Annex 8 of the initial petition. 10 See Annex 7 of the initial petition.