obstruction or omission constitutes violations of proper and timely administration of justice. Finally, the State observes that the petitioner could have filed a criminal complaint with the Public Prosecutor’s Office if she was so convinced that public order crimes were committed in the administration of justice in the cases prosecuted against her. IV. ANALYSIS ON COMPETENCE AND ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence 42. Under Article 44 of the American Convention, the petitioners are authorized to file a petition with the Commission. The alleged victim was under the jurisdiction of the Bolivian State at the time the facts alleged were said to have occurred. The State, for its part, is party to the American Convention, having deposited its instrument of ratification, in due and proper form, on July 19, 1979. The Commission therefore has competence ratione personae to examine the complaint lodged. It also has competence ratione materiae because the petitioners are alleging violation of rights protected by the American Convention. 43. The Commission has competence ratione temporis to examine the petition inasmuch as the obligation to respect and ensure the rights protected under the American Convention was already binding upon the Bolivian State at the time the events alleged in the petition occurred. Furthermore, the Commission has competence ratione loci because the petition alleges violations of Convention-protected rights said to have occurred in the territory of a state party. B. Exhaustion of the remedies under domestic law 44. Article 46(1)(a) of the American Convention provides that in order for a case to be admitted in accordance to Article 44 of the Convention, the remedies under domestic law must have been pursued and exhausted in accordance with generally recognized principles of international law. The purpose of this requirement is to afford national authorities the opportunity to address the alleged violation of a protected right and, where appropriate, resolve it before the matter is brought to the attention of an international body. 45. The requirement of prior exhaustion established in Article 46 of the Convention applies when the domestic remedies available in practice within the national system are adequate and effective in providing a remedy for the alleged violation. In this sense, Article 46(2) specifies that the requirement is not applicable when the domestic legislation does not afford due process for the protection of the right in question; or if the alleged victim did not have access to domestic remedies; or if there was unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgment under those remedies. As indicated by Article 31 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, when a petitioner alleges one of these exceptions, it then falls to the State to demonstrate that domestic remedies have not been exhausted, unless that is clearly evident from the record. 46. The State duly filed the objection claiming a failure to exhaust the remedies under domestic law, alleging that the petitioners did not file i) a petition of amparo in the criminal proceedings; ii) a complaint with the Ombudsman’s Office; and iii) a criminal or disciplinary action against the judges who heard the alleged victim’s cases. The petitioners, for their part, argued that the exceptions allowed under subparagraphs a) and c) of Article 46(2) of the Convention apply, since the State has incurred an unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgment in the criminal cases which, in their view, are blatantly contrary to due process. To assess the parties’ arguments and determine whether the requirement of exhaustion of local remedies has been satisfied, the Commission must first determine which remedy is adequate for correcting the situation put to the Commission. 47. The petitioners’ allegations can be summarized as follows: the alleged violations of the right to personal liberty, the right to a fair trial, the right to private property and the right to freedom of movement and residence, all in the criminal proceedings conducted against the alleged victim. As these were criminal cases alleged to be in violation of rights recognized in the American Convention, the Commission must analyze whether the remedies under domestic law have been 8