Constitutional Amendment No. 35/2001 altering the immunity institution established on the Federal Constitution. 28. In the information sent on July 19, 2007, the State affirmed that the criminal action against Mr. Aércio Pereira de Lima was on its second stage, called judgment stage. The judgment by the Jury Trial has been established for September 26, 2007. Moreover, the State alleged that the case be declared inadmissible as it does not meet the admissibility requirements established on Article 31(1) of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, and Article 46(1)(a) of the American Convention. IV. ANALYSIS OF COMPETENCE AND ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence 1. Competence of the Commission rationae personae, rationae loci, rationae temporis, and rationae materiae 29. The petitioners argue that the State has violated the rights of the alleged victim enshrined in Articles 2, 4, 24, and 25 of the American Convention; 10 and Articles 3, 4, 5, and 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará, 11 to the detriment of the alleged victim and her next-of-kin. 30. The petitioners are authorized by Article 44 of the Convention to submit complaints to the IACHR. The petition notes as the alleged victim Marcia Barbosa de Souza, a citizen of the Brazilian State, therefore, the Commission is competent rationae personae to examine the petition. 31. The Commission considers that it is competent rationae materiae, rationae loci, and rationae temporis as the petition addresses rights protected by the American Convention and the Convention of Belém do Pará, both in force at the time of the facts, and binding on the Federative Republic of Brazil. 32. With respect to its competence to apply the Inter-American Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (“Convention of Belém do Pará”), the Commission is competent in general as it is an inter-American human rights instrument, and also because of the specific charge to the Commission in Article 12 of that Convention, which states: Any person or group of persons, or any nongovernmental entity legally recognized in one or more member states of the Organization, may lodge petitions with the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights containing denunciations or complaints of violations of Article 7 of this Convention by a State Party, and the Commission shall consider such claims in accordance with the norms and procedures established by the American Convention on Human Rights and the Statutes and Regulations of the InterAmerican Commission on Human Rights for lodging and considering petitions. 2. Exhaustion of domestic remedies 33. Article 46(1)(a) of the Convention requires, in order for a petition or communication submitted to be admitted by the Commission, “that the remedies under domestic law have been pursued and exhausted in accordance with generally recognized 10 Ratified by Brazil on November 25, 1992. 11 Ratified by Brazil on November 27, 1995.