saw during the visit, particularly the deplorable security and hygiene conditions at the Penitentiary, which had led to new acts of violence as well as the death of several inmates in incidents that had not been clarified, all while the provisional measures were in effect. 30. On May 11, 2005 a public hearing was held in Asunción, Paraguay before the InterAmerican Court, with the participation of representatives from the Commission, representatives of the beneficiaries of the provisional measures and the State, in order for the Court to hear arguments regarding the facts and circumstances relating to implementation of the provisional measures ordered on November 22, 2004. On that date, a record was signed in which the parties indicated their agreement to keep the provisional measures in effect and agreed to bring to the consideration of the Inter-American Court a series of measures designed to evaluate the possibility of providing specifics on the content of the resolution of the Court of November 22, 2004. 31. According to the agreement on compliance signed by the parties in the framework of the provisional measures, those measures included, with respect to prison staff: the need to increase prison staff to ensure security within the facilities; to vary the surveillance patterns; to purge the prison officer corps; to ensure their ongoing training and instruction; and to require the authorities to report on the result of the investigations regarding operational responsibility in deaths and injuries at the Penitentiary of Mendoza and the Gustavo André Unit in Lavalle. They also included, with respect to separating inmates by categories: the need to adopt measures needed to separate accused inmates from convicted inmates and young adults from adults; and to develop a classification mechanism taking into account at least the criteria established in Article 8 of the United Nation’s Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. They also included measures to keep weapons out of the facilities and to establish a disciplinary regime consistent with the American Convention on Human Rights and other applicable international instruments on human rights. The agreement signed in Asunción also included measures to adopt progressive improvements in detention conditions, including implementing a census of those housed within the provincial prison system; access to showers and sanitary services that work; weekly provision of hygiene products; access to sufficient potable water; lighting of all prison areas; prohibition on extended shutdowns and hooded control groups and restrictions on visits; and prohibition on the entry of personnel with dogs in the cell blocks and in the area where visits take place. V. ANALYSIS OF ADMISSIBILITY A. The Commission’s competence ratione personae, ratione loci, rationetemporis and rationemateriae 32. In accordance with Article 44 of the American Convention, the petitioners are entitled to submit a petition to the IACHR. At first, the petition identified as petitioners the inmates of a cell block at the Penitentiary of Mendoza, and various inmates signed the petition. Subsequently, the request for precautionary measures was submitted in the name of the inmates of the Penitentiary of Mendoza and the Gustavo André Unit in Lavalle. When joining the petition, the Commission identified as alleged victims the inmates of the Penitentiary of Mendoza and the Gustavo André Unit in Lavalle, whose rights as provided under the American Convention Argentina has undertaken to guarantee and respect. It should be noted that a number of these inmates were identified by name during processing. The names of the original petitioners are among these names. In addition, the Commission received a copy of the complaint filed with the Defender of the People signed by various inmates of cell block 6 at the Provincial Penitentiary of Mendoza. The Commission has also identified various victims through copies of habeas corpus actions they filed and from other evidence submitted as part of the processing of the precautionary and provisional measures. In addition, the Commission has received hundreds of letters from inmates held at the Penitentiary of Mendoza. Other inmates can also be identified through the Penitentiary’s intake records. With respect to the State, the Commission points out that Argentina has been a party to the American Convention since September 5, 1984, when it deposited the respective ratification instrument. Therefore, the Commission is competent ratione personae to consider the petition. 5