and they therefore request application of the exception to exhaustion of domestic remedies provided in Article 46.2 of the Convention. 67. The State argues that the exception to prior exhaustion of domestic remedies presented by the petitioners is unfounded because the corresponding investigation is underway within the domestic jurisdiction in the Public Prosecutor’s Office. 68. The Commission notes that more than two years have gone by since the death of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes, during which the State has not supplied any details of the investigation conducted that would make it possible to conclude that the requirement for prior exhaustion of domestic remedies should prevent admission of the instant petition. In this sense, it should be pointed out that there are no specific provisions in the Convention or Rules of Procedure that define the length of time that constitutes “unwarranted delay,” meaning that the Commission evaluates each case to determine whether a delay exists. In the present case, the Commission finds that the State has reported only limited actions that do not go beyond the preliminary stages of the investigation, having failed to provide to the Commission in its various communications any details of progress or the existence, for example, of any person accused of or charged with the homicide of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes. 69. In the Commission’s opinion, the circumstances of the instant case, the time elapsed from the purported execution of the alleged victim to the date of approval of this report, during which the investigation has not gone beyond the preliminary stage, and the apparent lack of legal diligence constitute unwarranted delay; thus, the facts described are covered by the exception set forth in Article 46.2.c of the American Convention. 70. The Commission reiterates that invocation of exceptions to the requirement for exhaustion of domestic remedies established in Article 46.2 de la Convention is intimately linked to the determination of possible violations of certain rights guaranteed in that treaty, such as the right to a fair trial. However, Article 46.2 of the American Convention, by its nature and purpose, is an independent provision vis à vis the Convention’s substantive provisions. Therefore, consideration of whether the exceptions to exhaustion of domestic remedies established in that article apply to the case in question must be prior to and apart from the analysis of the merits of the case, because a different standard is applicable than the one used to determine a violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. It should be noted that the causes and effects that have prevented the exhaustion of domestic remedies in the present case will be analyzed, insofar as applicable, in the Commission’s report on the merits of the case, to determine whether they in fact constitute violations of the American Convention. 71. Based on the preceding arguments, the Commission finds sufficient grounds to exempt the petitioners from the requirement for prior exhaustion of domestic remedies in application of Article 46.2 of the American Convention, in connection with the torture and alleged summary execution of Mr. Ruiz Fuentes. Additionally, it finds that domestic remedies were exhausted with regard to the death sentence pronounced on the alleged victim. 2. Deadline for presentation of the petition 72. Article 46.1.b of the Convention stipulates that in order to be admitted, a petition must be lodged within a period of six months from the date on 12