compensation, because their convictions were the result of criminal procedures which respected all fair trial guarantees. 5. As set forth in this report, having examined the contentions of the parties on the question of admissibility, and without prejudging the merits of the matter, the Inter-American Commission decides to admit the present petition with respect to the claims concerning Articles I, II, XVIII, XXV and XXVI of the American Declaration and Articles 4, 5, 7, 8, 10, 17, 19, 24 and 25 of the American Convention. By virtue of the general principle of iura novit curia, the IACHR also admits this petition in relation to Articles VI and VII of the American Declaration and Articles 1.1 and 2 of the American Convention. On the other hand, the IACHR declares this petition inadmissible with respect to Article 11 of the American Convention. The IACHR also decides to notify the parties, publish this report and include it in its Annual Report to the General Assembly of the Organization of American States. II. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE IACHR 6. The petition was received on April 29, 1999, along with requests for precautionary measures. On May 7, 1999, the petitioners submitted additional information. On May 11, 1999, the IACHR forwarded the relevant parts of the petition to the State, and set a threemonth deadline in which to submit its comments. On August 19, 1999, the State submitted its response to the petition, which was duly transmitted to the petitioners. 7. The Inter-American Commission received additional information from the petitioners on the following dates: September 16, 1999, August 23, 2000, August 10, 2005, February 14, 2007, April 21, 2008 and February 6, 2009; these communications were duly forwarded to the State. On January 7, 2000, the State indicated that it would not be submitting any additional considerations regarding this petition, on the grounds that the IACHR should deem it inadmissible at its next sessions. Since then, Trinidad & Tobago has presented no further observations. Precautionary and provisional measures 8. On May 11, 1999, the Inter-American Commission issued precautionary measures on behalf of the alleged victims. In light of the absence of any response from the State to its request for precautionary measures, the IACHR submitted a request for provisional measures in favor of the alleged victims to the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (“the Inter-American Court”), on May 25, 1999. 9. On May 27, 1999, the Inter-American Court amplified the provisional measures previously ordered in the Matter of James et al. to include the alleged victims. 3 Trinidad & Tobago has not presented any of the periodic reports that were ordered by the Inter-American Court regarding the measures it has adopted to protect the life and personal integrity of the beneficiaries/alleged victims, despite constant requests by the Tribunal. 4 10. At the request of the Inter-American Court, on March 19, 2009, the IACHR submitted a communication to the Tribunal confirming the pending status of this petition. On July 6, 2009, the IACHR also informed the Inter-American Court of the commutation of the sentences of the alleged victims. III. POSITIONS OF THE PARTIES A. Position of the petitioners 3 In this order, the Inter-American Court amplified the provisional measures ordered in the Matter of James et al., and requested that Trinidad & Tobago take all necessary measures to preserve Mr. Dial’s and Mr. Dottin’s lives and physical integrity so as not to hinder the processing of their petition before the inter-American system. The InterAmerican Court maintained these measures in subsequent orders dated August, 16, 2000, November 24, 2000, September 3, 2002, December 2, 2003, February 28, 2005 and April 3, 2009, and determined in the last order that the measures be named “Matter of Dottin et. al.” 4 I/A Court H.R., Matter of James et. al, Provisional Measures regarding Trinidad and Tobago. Order of the InterAmerican Court of April 3, 2009, para. 14. 2