under study inadmissible with respect to Article 2 of the American Convention and Articles 3, 4, and 5 of the Convention of Belém do Pará. 5. Accordingly, the Commission decided to notify the parties and make public this report on admissibility, and include it in its Annual Report. II. PROCESSING BEFORE THE COMMISSION 6. On April 19, 2000, the Commission notified the State that a petition had been filed against it, and forwarded to it the pertinent parts of that complaint, in addition to notifying it of the moment the 90-day term established by Article 34 of the RegulatioS of the Commission in force at that time began to run, for the State to submit its answer. On that same date, an acknowledgement of receipt of their petition was communicated to the petitioners. 7. On August 8, 2000, the State requested an extension of the term granted to it to answer the petition; the fact that it was granted was communicated to the State on August 14, 2000. 8. On September 26, 2000, the State provided information to the Commission regarding the petition brought against it; this information was transmitted to the petitioners on October 5, 2000. They were given 45 days to submit observations on this information. On October 5, 2000, an acknowledgement of receipt of the information forwarded by the State was transmitted to the State. 9. By note of October 31, 2000, received by the Commission on November 2, 2000, the State provided additional information about the case; on November 20, 2000, it was transmitted to the petitioners, who were given 45 days to submit observations. That same day, the State was sent an acknowledgement of receipt regarding the information in question. 10. On December 21, 2000, the petitioners submitted observations on the additional information provided by the State. The acknowledgement of receipt of this information was communicated to them on December 26, 2000. On that same date, the observations alluded to were transmitted to the State, which was given 45 days to submit the observations it considered pertinent. 11. On May 20, 2003, the petitioners submitted additional information on the case. The acknowledgement of receipt of that information was sent to them on June 11, 2003; this information was transmitted to the State, so that it might submit any information as it saw fit within 30 days. 12. On September 7, 2006, the Commission asked the petitioners to submit current information on the case, and to indicate whether it was still interested in going forward with the case. The petitioners sent their response on October 3, 2006. 13. On November 17, 2006 the State requested an extension of 30 days, which was granted by the Commission on December 5, 2006. On July 19, 2007 the State sent new information on the case for the consideration of the Commission, which was sent to the petitioners on July 25, 2007 for their observations. III. THE PARTIES’ POSITIONS

Select target paragraph3