37. The State maintains that the JCE has still not issued a final decision, that the case is still open, and that the plaintiffs can still register the minors in question by complying with the requirements established by law. 38. The State also maintains that the plaintiffs have not sought remedy before the regular courts and that the Procurator, to whom they went to apply for a belated declaration of birth, is a representative of the Office of the Attorney General and not a judge. They thus argue that domestic remedies have not been exhausted. Moreover, the State holds that the Procurator incurred in a procedural error when accepting the appeal filed by the mothers of the alleged victims. They point to Article 41 of Law 659 which stipulates that it is the Civil Registry official who shall send a certified copy of the file to the Procurator of the Court District. 9 The State argues that the Procurator rejected the application for a belated declaration of birth on the basis of documental and procedural shortcomings. The State thus maintains that the JCE has not yet made any final decision in this case. 39. An examination of Dominican legislation in the possession of the Commission shows that the petitioners lack the authentication needed to initiate a court case since they must request the Procurator to do so according to Article 41 of Law 659. Moreover, examination of submissions shows that the Procurator did not authorize the judge of first instance to initiate an investigation on whether belated declarations of birth should be issued to Dilcia Yean and Violeta Bosica, as stipulated in Article 41 of law 659. 40. Jurisprudence in the inter-American system has established that a State claiming that domestic remedies have not been exhausted must show that suitable and effective remedies exist (onus probandis incumbit actoris) for reparation of the alleged violations, 10 or failing that, the State must explain what remedies should be exhausted or why they have not been effective. In the case under consideration, the State has not clearly shown what suitable and effective remedy or remedies exist that should have been exhausted by the petitioners. 41. The Commission notes that, in effect, the State has not proven that there is a suitable remedy capable of changing administrative decisions handed down by the Procurator or by the JCE. Neither has the State countered the petitioners’ claims that there are no mechanisms that would allow the plaintiffs to proceed with a direct appeal. 42. For the above-mentioned reasons, the Commission considers the petitioners to have exhausted the remedies expressly provided for in current domestic law, in accordance with Article 46(1) of the American Convention. Moreover, there are no suitable domestic remedies available that need to be exhausted before resorting to the international level and thus the exception to exhaustion of domestic remedies provided for in Article 46(2)(a) is to be applied in this case. 43. In this regard, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights has pointed out: When certain exceptions to the rule of non-exhaustion of domestic remedies are invoked, such as the remedies not being effective or due process of law not being afforded, the implication is not only that the harmed party is not obligated to file for such remedies, but that the State is violating anew the obligations it has under the Convention. In such circumstances, the question of domestic remedies draws very close to the merits. 11 9 Article 41 of Law 659 on Acts of the Civil Administration stipulates that, “The Civil Administration official who has received a belated declaration of birth will immediately send a certified copy of the file to the Procurator of the corresponding Court District, who shall investigate the case and then remit it to the Court of First Instance. In his investigation, the Procurator may seek any and all evidence. He may consult books and registries, request papers pertaining to the parents (even if deceased), hear witnesses and summon the concerned parties to appear before him in order to decide whether or not to grant the belated declaration. The Procurator will remit a copy of his decision to the Civil Administration official …” 10 In this regard the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, in the Preliminary Exceptions of the Velásquez Rodríguez Case, said, “A State claiming non-exhaustion is responsible for pointing to what domestic remedies should be exhausted and their effectiveness.” Judgment of 26 June 1987, Paragraph 88. 11 Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Preliminary Exceptions, Velásquez Rodríguez Case, Judgment of 26 June 1987, Paragraph 91. 6