6 victim, the IACHR cannot hear the merits of the case in that its purpose is not to act as a special instance. Based on the foregoing, the State asks that the instant petition be declared inadmissible. IV. ANALYSIS OF COMPETENCE AND ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence ratione personae, ratione temporis, ratione loci, and ratione materiae of the Inter-American Commission 24. The petitioners are authorized by Article 44 of the American Convention to submit complaints to the IACHR. The petition indicates as the alleged victims natural persons w ith respect to w hom the State has agreed to respect and guarantee the rights enshrined in the American Convention. With respect to the State, the Commission indicates that Nicaragua has been a State Party to the American Convention since September 25, 197 9, the date on w hich it deposited its ratifying instrument. Thus, the Commission is competent ratione personae to examine the petition. The Commission is also competent ratione loci to hear the petition in that it alleges violations of rights protected in the American Convention that occurred w ithin the territory of Nicaragua, a State Party to that treaty. 25. The Commission is competent ratione temporis because the obligation to respect and guarantee rights protected by the American Convention w as in force for the State on the date w hen the events alleged in the petition occurred. Finally, the Commission is competent ratione materiae because the petition denounces possible violations of human rights protected by the American Convention. B. Exhaustion of domestic resources 26. Article 46.1.a of the American Convention provides that in order for a complaint submitted to the Inter-American Commission to be admissible in accordance w ith Article 44 of the Convention the domestic remedies must have been pursued and exhausted in accordance w ith generally recognized principles of international law . The purpose of this requirement is to allow domestic authorities to learn of the alleged violation of a protected right and, if appropriate, resolve it before it is heard by an international body. 27. In the instant case, the petitioners assert that the domestic remedies w ere exhausted w ith the ruling of the Criminal Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice of Nicaragua (Case No. 2019-2004) of December 19, 2006, w hich declared inadmissible a cassation appeal filed by Mrs. Acosta. In contrast, the State maintains that the domestic remedies have been improperly exhausted, because the ruling ordering the final acquittal of the individuals identified by the petitioners as being responsible for the murder of Mr. García Valle w as not appealed in the proper time and manner. 28. In order to analyze satisfaction of the requirement that domestic remedies be exhausted, the Commission must identify the appropriate remedy to be exhausted according to the circumstances, w hich is understood to mean the remedy that can resolve the violated legal status. 8 According to the report, the suitable remedy for responding to the situation reported w as the criminal case initiated for the murder of Mr. García Valle, w hich included various courts. 29. The information appearing in the case file indicates that on May 13, 2002, in the criminal process under court file 110 -02, the District Criminal Court of Bluefields issued a final decision in favor of three individuals prosecuted for the crime of murdering Mr. Francisco García Valle. On May 16, 2002, the legal representative of Mrs. Acosta filed an appeal against the decision 8 IACHR, Report No. 22/09, Admissibility, Igmar Alexander Landaeta Mejías, Venezuela, March 20, 2009. Para. 45. 6