V. CONCLUSIONS 55. The Commission concludes that it competent to examine the complaint lodged by the petitioner, and that the petition is admissible pursuant to Articles 46 and 47 of the Convention, for the alleged violation of Articles 21 and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1 and 2 of the same instrument. 56. With regard to what is raised by the petitioner in the complaint, to the effect that it seeks a finding that the State of Honduras violated ILO Convention 169, the Commission has no jurisdiction over the matter, without prejudice to which it can be used as a guide for interpreting the conventional obligations, in light of Article 29 of the American Convention. 57. Based on the arguments of fact and law set forth above, and without prejudging on the merits, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 1. To find this petition admissible, in relation to the alleged violations of the rights protected at Articles 21 and 25 in relation to Articles 1 and 2 of the American Convention. 2. To notify the parties of this decision. 3. To continue with the analysis on the merits. 4. To publish this decision and include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. Done and signed in the city of Washington, D.C., on March 24th, 2010. (Signed: Felipe González, President; Dinah Shelton, Second Vice-President; María Silvia Guillén, José de Jesús Orozco Henríquez, and Rodrigo Escobar Gil, members of the Commission). 2002; IACHR, Report N° 40/04, Indigenous Mayan Communities of the Toledo District, Belize, October 12, 2004 and others that may be relevant 9