10 guaranteed by the American Convention, but not to establish the existence of the violation. 20 In this stage it is fitting to make a summary analysis that does not imply a prejudgment or an advance opinion on the merits. The Regulations of the Inter-American Commission, in establishing an admissibility stage and a separate merits stage, reflects this distinction between the evaluation the Inter-American Commission must make for the purposes of declaring a petition admissible and that required to establish whether or not there a violation has been committed imputable to the State. 21 39. Neither the American Convention nor the Regulations of the IACHR require the petitioner to identify the specific rights that have allegedly been violated by the State in the matter submitted to the Commission, though petitioners may do so. It is incumbent on the Commission, based on the jurisprudence of the system, to determine in their admissibility reports which provisions of the relevant Inter-American instruments are applicable and could establish the rights violations if the alleged facts are proven by sufficient elements. 40. In this case, the petitioners claim discriminatory treatment against Mr. Luis Fernando Guevara Díaz, because of allegedly discretionary selection in a competitive hiring process to fill a position he held in the Finance Ministry, which led to his termination at that institution. The State, for its part, affirms that the process in which Mr. Guevara Díaz participated was carried out in keeping with national and international law governing matters related to persons with disabilities, and that the alleged victim had access to the job he sought under conditions that were equal vis-à-vis other candidates. 41. The Commission considers that the arguments put forth by the petitioners with regards to the possible violation of the right to equality and judicial protection, to the injury of the alleged victim, are not manifestly groundless. Concerning this, the Commission must, in the merits phase, determine if during the competitive process and appointment the alleged victim was given guarantees of equal treatment. 22 In particular, [the Commission must consider] the alleged gap between the “Law of Equal Opportunity for Persons with Disabilities” and the legal regulation that would establish a discretionary power for selecting from a list of proposed candidates for the job, the alleged lack of grounds for the selection made, and the alleged lack of judicial protection. 42. Therefore, the IACHR considers that the facts of the petition characterize violations of the rights established in Articles 8.1, 24, and 25 of the American Convention, as these relate to the provisions of Articles 1.1 and 2 of that Convention. Additionally, the Commission indicates that for the purpose of analyzing the merits it will rely on the provisions of the Protocol of San Salvador and 20 See IACHR Report No. 128/91, Case 12.367, Mauricio Herrera Ulloa and Fernán Vargas Rhormoser of the “La Nación” newspaper (Costa Rica), 3 December 2001, paragraph 50; Report No. 4/04, Petition 12.324, Rubén Luis Godoy (Argentina), 24 February 2004, paragraph 43; Report No. 32/07, Petition 429-05, Juan Patricio Marileo Sravia et al (Chile), 23 April 2007, paragraph 54. 21 See IACHR Report No. 31/03, Case 12.195, <Mario Alberto Jara Oñate et al (Chile), 7 March 2003, paragraph 41; Report No. 4/04, Petition 12.324, Rubén Luis Godoy (Argentina), 24 February 2004, paragraph 43; Petition 429-05, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia et al (Chile), 23 April 2007, paragraph 54; Petition 581-05, Victor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe (Chile), 2 May 2007, paragraph 46. 22 For the effects of analysis of characterization, the Commission cites the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court, which sets forth the following: Persons with disabilities are often the object of discrimination because of their condition, therefore the States shall adopt measures that are legislative, social, educational, work-related, or of any other type as needed so that all discrimination associated with mental disabilities be eliminated, and to create the conditions for full integration of these persons into society. (Inter-American Court of Human Rights, Case Ximenes Lopes vs. Brazil, ruling on the merits, 4 July 2006, paragraphs 13 and 105).