B. Admissibility requirements 1. Exhaustion of remedies under domestic law 34. Article 46.1.a) of the American Convention provides that, for a petition filed with the InterAmerican Commission to be admissible in conformity with Article 44 of the same instrument, remedies under domestic law must have been attempted and exhausted in conformity with the generally recognized principles of international law. This requirement is aimed at making it possible for national authorities to learn about the violation of a protected right and, if appropriate, to have the opportunity to resolve the case before it is heard by an international body. 35. The requirement of prior exhaustion of remedies is applicable when the national system effectively has resources available that are adequate and effective to remedy the alleged violation. In that respect, Article 46.2 specifies that the requirement is not applicable when: a) the domestic legislation of the state does not afford due process of law for the protection of the right allegedly violated; b) the party alleging violation of his rights has been denied access to the remedies; or c) there has been unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgment under those remedies. 36. The Commission observes that the present petitions refer to alleged forced disappearances perpetrated by civil servants of the Peruvian State to the detriment of the Wilfredo Terrones Silva and Néstor Rojas Medina, as well as the failure to investigate the incidents. 37. The Commission notes that, regarding case 12.225, the next of kin of Néstor Rojas Medina filed the corresponding criminal proceedings with the authorities having jurisdiction. Thus, the first complaint was filed on February 5, 1991 with the Provincial Prosecution Service of Tocache, where it was archived provisionally. A second criminal complaint was filed on September 16, 2004 by Ms. Marcela Medina Negrón, the mother of Néstor Rojas Medina, with the Office of the Provincial Prosecution Service Specializing in Forced Disappearances. 38. As for case 11.053, the Commission notes that the Peruvian State had been informed of the alleged forced disappearance of Mr. Wilfredo Terrones Silva on August 28, 1992, date on which his next of kin had reported his disappearance at the Fifteenth Criminal Prosecution Service of Lima. Afterwards, in its Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Peru on March 12, 1993, the Commission had voiced its concern over complaints about the disappearance of various persons in 1992, among whom there was Mr. Wilfredo Terrones Silva.5 39. The Commission has pointed out that, whenever a crime that must be prosecuted ex officio is committed, the state has the obligation to promote and request criminal proceedings and that, in these cases, that was the suitable channel to clarify the facts, try those responsible, and provide the appropriate criminal sanctions against them, in addition to facilitating other modes of reparation. The facts that were described by the petitioners regarding cases 11.053 and 12.225 tend to establish criminal activities that should have been investigated and tried by the state at its own initiative. 40. The Commission observes that the investigation of both cases might have been obstructed by the adoption of Law No. 26479 of June 14, 1995, whose first article reads as follows: […] general amnesty for military, police, or civilian staff […] who are being investigated, reported, indicted, processed or convicted for ordinary offenses or military crimes […] for all incidents stemming from and caused by, on occasion or as a result of, the counter-terrorism fight […] from May 1980 to the date of enactment of the present law.6 5 IACHR. Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Peru, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.83, Doc. 31, March 12, 1993, Section III, para. 90, available at: http://www.cidh.org/countryrep/Peru93sp/iii.htm 6 Law No. 26479 of June 14, 1995, available at: Internet portal of the Congress of the Republic of Peru: www.congreso.gob.pe/ntley/Imagenes/Leyes/26479.pdf