51.For the purposes of admissibility, the Commission must decide whether the petition states facts that tend to establish a violation, as described in Article 47(b) of the American Convention, whether the petition is “manifestly groundless,” or “obviously out of order,” as described in sub-paragraph c) of the same Article. 52.The standard of judgment of these two extremes differs from that required to decide on the merits of a petition. The Commission must carry out a prima facie examination to establish whether or not the petition establishes the apparent or potential violation of a right protected by the Convention, not to establish the existence of a violation. This examination is a summary analysis that does not imply a prejudgment or anticipation of findings on the merits. 7 53.Regarding the facts alleged in connection with the detention of Eduardo José Landaeta, the circumstances following this, his death whilst in police custody, the Commission finds could amount to a violation, to his detriment, of his rights to life, physical integrity, personal freedom, and lack of duty of special care for children, enshrined respectively in Articles 4, 5, 7, and 19 of the American Convention, all in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument. 54.Regarding the facts alleged in connection with the judicial action taken in the domestic jurisdiction and the way in which the criminal investigation has been conducted to date, the Commission finds these could amount to violations of the rights to mental and moral integrity, judicial guarantees and judicial protection enshrined respectively in Articles 5(1), 8(1) and 25 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument, to the detriment of Mr. Ignacio Landaeta Muñoz, and Mrs. María Mejías as parents of Eduardo José Landaeta. V. CONCLUSIONS 55.Based on the foregoing considerations of fact and law, and without prejudging the merits of the case, the Commission concludes that the present case meets the requirements for admissibility in accordance with Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention and therefore, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 1. To declare this case admissible in relation to Articles 4, 5, 7, 19, 8, and 25 of the American Convention in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument. 2. To give notice of this decision to the parties. 3. To continue the analysis of the merits of the case. 4. To publish this decision and include it in its Annual Report to the General Assembly of the OAS. Done and signed in the city of Washington, D.C., on the 9th day of the month of March, 2007. (Signed): Florentín Meléndez, President; Paolo G. Carozza, First Vice-President; Víctor E. Abramovich, Second Vice-President; Evelio Fernández Arévalos, Sir Clare K. Roberts, Commissioners. 7 IACHR, Report No. 21/04, Petition 12,190. Admissibility, José Luis Tapia González and others, Chile, February 24, 2004, paragraph 33 8