that, if proved, tend to establish violations of the rights guaranteed by the Convention, and that the statements of the Petitioners are not on the information provided manifestly groundless or obviously out of order. Consequently, the claims in the petition are not barred as inadmissible under Article 47(b) and 47(c) of the Convention and Article 34(a) and (b) of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure. V. CONCLUSIONS 29. The Commission concludes that it has the competence to examine this case, and that the petition is admissible in accordance with Articles 46 and 47 of the Convention and Articles 31 to 34 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure. 30. On the basis of the findings of fact and law set forth above, and without prejudging the merits of the matter, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS DECIDES: 1. To declare admissible the Petitioners’ claims as to the alleged violations of Articles 2, 5, 8 and 25 of the Convention. 2. To give notice of this decision to the State and to the Petitioners. 3. To continue with the analysis of the merits of the case. 4. To publish this Report and include it in the Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. Done and signed in the city of Washington, D.C., the 10th day of the month of October, 2001. (Signed): Dean Claudio Grossman, President; Dr. Juan Méndez, First Vice-President; Lic. Marta Altolaguirre, Second Vice-President; Prof. Hélio Bicudo, Prof. Robert K. Goldman, Dr. Peter Laurie, and Dr. Julio Prado Vallejo, Commissioners. 6