7 33. The invocation of the exceptions to the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies rule provided in Article 46(2) of the Convention is closely linked to the determination of possible violations of certain rights enshrined therein, such as the guarantees on access to justice. How ever, given its nature and purpose, Article 46(2) is a rule w ith autonomous content vis-à-vis the substantive rules of the Convention. Therefore, the det ermination as to w hether the exceptions to the rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies are applicable to the case in question must be made prior to and separately from the analysis of the merits of the case, in that it depends on a standard of assessment different from that used to determine the possible violation of Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention. It should be made clear that the causes and effects that prevented the exhaustion of domestic remedies w ill be analyzed in the report that the Commission adopts on the merits of the dispute, in order to establish w hether there are violations of the American Convention . 2. Deadline for submitting the petition 34. The American Convention provides that in order for a petition to be ruled admissible by the Commission it must be submitted w ithin a period of six months after the date on w hich the alleged injured party is notified of a final decision. In the complaint under review here, the IACHR has established the application of the exceptions to the exhaustion of domestic remedies in accordance w ith Article 46(2)(c) of the American Convention. In this regard, Article 32 of the Commission’ s Rules of Procedure establishes that in cases in w hich the exceptions to the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies are applicable, the petition must be submitted w ithin a reasonable period of time, in the judgment of the Commission. For this purpose, the Commission must consider the date on w hich the alleged violation of rights occurred and the circumstances in each case. 35. In the instant case, the petition w as received in December 1990 and the event covered in the complaint occurred on November 19, 1987. The case involves an alleged forced disappearance, a crime that as continuously held by the case law of the inter-American system constitutes an ongoing violation, and its alleged effects in terms, inter alia, of the alleged failure to administer justice continue up to the present . Therefore, in view of the context and characteristics of the instant case, as w ell as the fact that an investigation is still suspended in the preliminary investigation phase, the Commission deems that the petition w as submitted w ithin a reasonable period of time and the admissibility requirement w ith respect to the deadline for submission should be considered satisfied. 3. Duplication of proceedings and international res judicata 36. The Commission notes that the State reported that the facts in this petition have been under review by the United Nations Working Group on Enforced or Involuntary Disappearances since December 9, 1998. Article 46(1)(c) of the Convention provides that in order for a petition to be admitted by the Commission it shall be required that “ the subject of the petition or communication is not pending in another international proceeding for settlement ” and Article 47(d) of the Convention provides that the Commission shall declare inadmissible any petition or communication w hen it is “ substantially the same as one previously studied by the Commission or by another international organization.” 37. The Commission has maintained that in order to deem that there is duplication or international res judicata in a case the petition must be under consideration or have been decided 7 by an international organization that is competent to adopt decisions on the specific facts contained in the petition as w ell as measures intended to bring about the effective settlement of the dispute 7 See IACHR. Report No. 89/05, Petition 12.103, Inadmissibility, Cecilia Rosa Núñez Chipana, Peru, October 24, 2005, para. 37. IACHR. Report No. 96/98, Petition 11.828, Admissibility, Peter Blaine, Jamaica, December 17, 1998, para. 40.