27. Petitioners are entitled to lodge a complaint with the Commission pursuant to Article 44 of
the American Convention. The Petition designates as alleged victim an individual whose rights
Haiti committed to uphold and guarantee given the general obligation to respect rights which it
subscribed under Article 1 of the American Convention. The Republic of Haiti has been a party
to the American Convention since it deposed its instrument of accession thereto on September
27, 1977. The Commission thus holds that it has the requisite competence ratione personae to
adjudicate the petition before it.
28. The Commission considers that it is competent ratione loci to consider the petition as the
alleged violations were committed within the territory of a state party to this treaty.
29. The Commission likewise considers that it is competent ratione temporis since the petition
relates to acts allegedly committed in 2001 when the obligations assumed by the State
following its subscription to the American Convention were in effect.
30. Finally, the Commission holds that it has the competence ratione materiaebecause the
case denounces alleged violations of rights which are protected by the American Convention,
namely the Right to humane treatment (Article 5), to personal liberty (Article 7) and the right
to a fair trial (Article 8).
C.
Other Admissibility Requirements
1.
Exhaustion of domestic remedies
31. Article 46(1)(a) of the Convention stipulates that admission of a petition shall be subject to
the requirement “that the remedies under domestic law have been pursued and exhausted in
accordance with generally recognized principles of international law”. The Convention’s
preamble states that the IACHR grants “international protection in the form of a convention
reinforcing or complementing the protection provided by the domestic law of the respective
states. 5 The rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies allows the state to resolve the
problem in keeping with its domestic law before being faced with an international proceeding,
which is especially valid in respect of the international jurisdiction over human rights matters.
32. In this matter, the State did not argue the failure to exhaust domestic remedies. It can
thus be presumed that the State has tacitly waived a possible objection of non-exhaustion of
domestic remedies. The Inter-American Court has indicated that the objection to nonexhaustion of domestic remedies, if it is to be timely, must be raised in the first stages of the
proceedings, failing which, a presumption of a tacit waiver by the state to avail itself of it may
be made. 6 The IACHR concludes that in this case there has been a tacit waiver by the State.
D.
Time period for submission of the petition
33. Pursuant to Article 46(1)(b) of the American Convention, the general rule is that a petition
must be submitted within six months, counted “from the date on which the party alleging
violation of his rights was notified of the final judgment”. In the petition under consideration,
the Commission has established a tacit waiver by the State of its right to invoke nonexhaustion of domestic remedies, thus the requirement of Article 46(1)(b) of the Convention is
not applicable.
34. Nonetheless, the requirements of exhaustion of domestic remedies and submission within
six months of the judgment exhausting domestic remedies, both set forth in the American
Convention, are independent. Therefore, the Commission must determine whether the petition
under consideration was submitted within a reasonable time.
5
6
See second paragraph of the Preamble of the American Convention.
Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Velásquez Rodríguez Case. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of June 26,
1987, § 8; Fairén Garbi and Solís Corrales Case. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of June 26, 1987, §87;Gangaram
Panday Case. Preliminary Objections. Judgment of December 4, 1991, §38; Loayza Tamayo Case. Preliminary
Objections Judgment of January 31, 1996, §40.
4