7 and prosecute,7 and that in such cases, this is the best way to clarify the facts, judge the perpetrators, and establish the corresponding criminal punishment, in addition to providing for other forms of reparation, including financial reparation. 35. The Commission notes that the family of Herminio Deras García had denounced to the First Criminal Court of First Instance in and for San Pedro Sula on February 4, 1983, that Mr. Deras had been murdered on January 29, 1983. In 1998, the Public Prosecution Service filed charges against three military officials with the Third Lower Court for Criminal Matters in and for San Pedro Sula. On the order of the court–of November 3, 1999–the case against two of the officials was separated because they were absent. 36. The third official was convicted at second instance for the crime of murder by the sectional Court of Appeals of San Pedro Sula on May 23, 2005, which decision was upheld in a cassation hearing by the Supreme Court of Justice on March 8, 2007. The decision has yet to be enforced because the convicted individual has been a fugitive of justice since 2004, after an order for his release was issued following his acquittal at first instance. The case is currently before the Criminal Enforcement Court of San Pedro Sula. And on February 27, 2009, that court issued a warrant for the arrest of the convicted person. The IACHR has no information about any other steps that the Honduran authorities are adopting to enforce the above decision. It also has no information about the status of the procedures or measures adopted in the investigation concerning the possible participation of other agents of the state in the facts surrounding the death of Herminio Deras. 37. In light of the foregoing, given the characteristics of this petition and the time elapsed since the facts that are the subject of the complaint occurred, the Commission finds to be applicable the exceptions provided in Article 46(2)(c) of the American Convention as regards the unwarranted delay in domestic judicial proceedings. Therefore, the rule on exhaustion of domestic remedies can be set aside. 38. As to the allegations regarding acts of torture, illegal detentions, and trespass committed by state officials to the detriment of family members of Herminio Deras García, the IACHR finds that the persecution to which several members of the Deras García family appear to have been subjected was alleged in the domestic judicial proceeding concerning the murder of Mr. Deras and, therefore, they are within the scope of the Commission's analysis. 39. All that remains to be noted in this respect is that invocation of the exceptions to the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies provided in Article 46(2) of the Convention is closely linked to the determination of possible violations of certain rights set forth therein, such as guarantees of access to justice. However, Article 46(2), by its nature and purpose, is a self-contained provision vis á vis the substantive provisions contained in the Convention. Therefore, to determine whether or not the exceptions to the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies provided in subparagraphs (a), (b) and (c) of the aforesaid provision are applicable to a particular case requires an examination carried out prior to and separate from the analysis of the merits of the case, since it depends on a standard of evaluation different to that used to establish whether or not there has been a violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. It should be clarified that the causes and effects that have prevented exhaustion of domestic remedies will be examined in the report that the IACHR adopts on the merits of the dispute, in order to determine if they constitute violations of the American Convention. 7 Report 52/97, Case 11.218, Arges Sequeira Mangas, Annual Report of the IACHR 1997, pars. 96 and 97. See also Report 55/97, par. 392. Report 62/00, Case 11.727, Hernando Osorio Correa, Annual Report of the IACHR 2000, pars. 24.