set to guarantee the State in question the opportunity of resolving disputes within its own legal framework.2 20. The Commission thus understands that in the case at hand, the remedies offered by military criminal law have been exhausted, and so the judgment of March 13, 2001, handed down by the Court of Military Justice constitutes, for the purposes of Article 46(a) of the American Convention, the final judgment. b. Filing Period 21. As stipulated in Article 46(1)(b) of the Convention, all petitions must be lodged on a timely basis in order to be admitted: that is, within the six months following the date on which the complainant was notified of the final decision adopted under domestic law. The sixmonth rule guarantees legal certainty and stability once a decision has been handed down. 22. According to the case file before the Commission, the judgment of the Court of Military Justice was handed down on March 13, 2001, six months prior to the submission of the complaint to the Commission, on September 13, 2001. c. Duplication of Proceedings and Res Judicata 23. Article 46(1)(c) states that the admissibility of a petition depends on the matter not being “pending in another international proceeding for settlement,” and Article 47(d) of the Convention provides that the Commission cannot admit a petition that is “substantially the same as one previously studied by the Commission or by another international organization.” The parties in the case at hand have not claimed the existence of either of these grounds for inadmissibility, nor can the existence of either one be inferred from the proceedings. d. Characterization of the Alleged Facts 24. Article 47(b) of the American Convention stipulates that any petition that does not state facts that tend to establish a violation of the rights guaranteed therein shall be declared inadmissible. In this regard, the Commission concludes that the alleged facts can give rise to questions related to the guarantees set forth in Article 25(c) of the Convention, namely ensuring that the competent authorities enforce, with respect to all persons, all judicial decisions in which remedies are granted. 25. The Commission considers that, in this case, if the facts are proven to be true, they could tend to establish a violation of the rights protected by Articles 8, 25(c), and 1(1) of the American Convention. V. CONCLUSIONS 26. The Commission concludes that it is competent to hear this case and that the petition is admissible in conformity with the exception provided for in Article 46(2)(d) of the American Convention. 2 The Commission cannot avoid noting the contradictory position adopted by the State. Thus, on the one hand it argues that exhaustion has not taken place (paragraphs 10 and 11) and, on the other, that the six-month deadline has expired (paragraph 13).