43. The proper recourse for this allegation was proceedings N 24079 (“for maltreatment”), which
also dealt with the alleged removal of a medical report evidencing the torture allegedly inflicted on
the petitioner. Domestic jurisdiction was exhausted with the ruling of the Supreme Court of
Justice of the Nation on April 15, 1997, dismissing the petitioner’s complaint alleging that
extraordinary recourse had been denied. Consequently, the Commission holds that the
requirement has been met in this aspect of the case.
Regarding the alleged denial of a fair trial
44. The proper recourse for this allegation was proceedings N 32989, begun by the petitioner on
February 11, 1995, “for irregularities in the proceedings [24079, allegedly committed by
unidentified police and judicial officers.]” The petitioner had claimed that “no procedural measure
was ever ordered,” but in a later communication he admitted that the magistrate responsible for
Investigating Court N 30 dismissed the complaint “because no crime existed.” The petitioner holds
that, “I was legally unable to appeal against this resolution, and so to date it is final and the case
has been FILED” [emphasis in the original]. Since State has not challenged that claim, in
connection with these proceedings the domestic remedies are deemed to have been exhausted.
Regarding the alleged threats made by police personnel
45. The proper recourse for this was proceedings N 25156, the purpose of which was to address
the alleged threats made by members of the Federal Police. It was “opened on March 14, 1989,
and, on March 29, 1989 (15 days later), it was closed without any investigation being conducted
or procedural measure ordered under a provisional dismissal ruling that, to date, is final and the
proceedings have been FILED” [emphasis in the original].
46. Unlike the allegations regarding arbitrary arrest and torture, in this regard the petitioner has
not supplied evidence to indicate his exhaustion of the available domestic remedies. The petitioner
has not claimed to have appealed against the decision in proceedings N 25156, nor has he
claimed that additional remedies do not exist. The State, in contrast, has alleged the petitioner’s
global failure to exhaust domestic remedies. Consequently, the Commission concludes that this
aspect of the case is inadmissible because said remedies have not been exhausted.
47 In summary, for the purposes of processing this case, the domestic remedies have been
exhausted in connection with the allegations of arbitrary arrest, torture, and the denial of a fair
trial. They have not been exhausted as regards the alleged threats made by members of the
police.
b.
Filing period
48 The following section analyzes compliance with this requirement in respect of the proceedings
in which the domestic remedies were deemed to have been exhausted. Under Article 46(1)(b) of
the Convention and Article 38(1) of the Commission’s Regulations, the deadline for submitting
petitions is six months after the date on which notice of the “final ruling” is served. The petition in
this case was submitted on August 24, 1994, and that will be used as the starting date for
calculating compliance with this requirement.
Regarding the alleged arbitrary arrest
49. The Commission’s file does not contain a copy of the final ruling in proceedings N 24519 (for
fraud), during which the petitioners’ preventive custody was ordered. But the petitioner has
maintained that, “A provisional dismissal was ordered in October 1988, and that ruling has been
7