24. In the claim under analysis, the IACHR has applied the exception to the requirement of exhaustion of domestic remedies pursuant to Article 46(2)(c) of the American Convention. In this respect, Article 32 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure establishes that in those cases in which the exceptions to the prior exhaustion rule apply, the petition should be filed in a time the Commission considers reasonable. To that end, the Commission should consider the date of the alleged violation of rights and the circumstances of each case. 25. In the petition under analysis, the facts alleged took place on February 27, 2007. The petition was filed on April 20, 2007. Therefore, the Commission concludes that this action meets the requirement established in Article 46(1)(b) of the American Convention. 3. Duplication of procedures and international res judicata 26. It does not appear from the record that the subject matter of the petition is pending in any other international proceeding for settlement, or that it reproduces a petition already examined by this or any other international organization. Therefore, one should consider that the requirements established at Articles 46(1)(c) and 47(d) of the Convention have been met. 4. Colorable claim 27. For the purposes of admissibility, the Commission should decide whether the facts alleged tend to establish a violation of any of the rights recognized in the American Convention, as stipulated in Article 47(b) of that instrument, or whether the petition is "manifestly groundless" or "obviously out of order,” pursuant to Article 47(c). The criterion for analyzing admissibility is different from that used for the analysis of the merits, given that the Commission only performs a prima facie analysis to determine whether the petitioners establish an apparent or possible violation of a right guaranteed by the American Convention. It is a summary analysis that does not imply prejudging or issuing a preliminary opinion on the merits. 28. Neither the American Convention nor the IACHR Rules of Procedure require a petitioner to identify the specific rights allegedly violated by the State in the matter brought before the Commission, although petitioners may do so. It is for the Commission, based on the system's jurisprudence, to determine in its admissibility report which provisions of the relevant Inter-American instruments are applicable and could be found to have been violated if the alleged facts are proven by sufficient elements. 29. The petitioner argues that he was a victim of attempted homicide; that his 16-year-old brother was assassinated because of the persecution against him; and that the facts remain in impunity. At the same time, the State indicates that there has been no direct or indirect participation of state agents, and consequently it refers to the lack of state responsibility. 30. The Inter-American Commission understands that, according to the petitioner´s approach, there is an alleged denial of justice regarding purported violent attacks that are said to have resulted in the death of his brother and to have affected him. In that regard, the IACHR observes that if proven, the facts alleged could tend to establish possible violations of the rights at Articles 5(1), 8(1), and 25 of the American Convention with respect to Baptiste Willer and in Articles 19, 8(1), and 25 of the same instrument to the detriment of Frédo Guirant, all in relation to Article 1(1) of the American Convention. The Commission will examine the facts alleged in light of Article 19 of the American Convention, specifically in relation to the special duty of protection that corresponds to the states, in keeping with the principle of the best interest of the child and the corpus juris in relation to the rights of children and adolescents. V. CONCLUSIONS 31. The Inter-American Commission concludes that it is competent to examine the claims presented in this matter, and that the petition is admissible pursuant to Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention. Based on the arguments of fact and law set forth above, and without it representing any prejudgment on the merits,