alleged victims are physical persons, in respect of whom the Colombian State undertook the obligation to respect and guarantee the rights established in the American Convention. Colombia has been a State party to the American Convention since July 31, 1973, the date on which it deposited the relevant instrument of ratification. The Commission therefore has jurisdiction ratione personae to examine the petition. 22. Similarly, the Commission has jurisdiction ratione loci to consider the petition, since it alleges violations of rights protected by the American Convention that took place under the jurisdiction of the State. The Commission has jurisdiction ratione temporis to examine the petition, since the obligation to respect and guarantee the rights protected by the American Convention was already in force for the State on the date that the events alleged in the petition occurred. Finally, the Commission has jurisdiction ratione materiae, because the petition reports possible violations of human rights protected by the American Convention. B. 1. Requirements for admissibility of the petition Exhaustion of domestic remedies 23. The State alleges that the petitioners’ complaint should be declared inadmissible, due to failure to meet the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies stipulated in Article 46(1) of the American Convention, and to failure to make use of all adequate domestic means to remedy the alleged violations. The petitioners, on the other hand, allege that the exception to the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies stipulated in Article 46(2) of the American Convention is applicable, by virtue of the delay and ineffectiveness of the criminal investigation. 24. In view of the allegations of the parties, first it is necessary to clarify the domestic remedies that must be exhausted in a case such as the present one, in the light of the jurisprudence of the inter-American system. The Commission’s case law establishes that whenever a crime liable to prosecution by the State is committed, the State has the obligation to promote and expedite criminal proceedings until their final consequences, 3 And that, in such cases, this is the best way to clarify the facts, judge the perpetrators, and establish the corresponding criminal punishment, in addition to providing for other monetary reparations. The Commission considers that the events described by the petitioners involve the alleged violation of fundamental rights, such as the right to life, to humane treatment, and to personal liberty, which are regarded under domestic legislation as crimes liable to prosecution by the State, which is also expected to promote the corresponding investigation and prosecution. 25. In this regard the Inter-American Court has held that only adequate remedies to rectify the alleged violations are expected to be exhausted. “Adequate” remedies means that the function of those remedies in the context of the domestic legal system is suitable for protecting the violated legal situation. In all domestic legal systems, there are many remedies, but not all are applicable in all circumstances. If in a specific case, the remedy is not adequate or appropriate, it is evident that it does not have to be exhausted. This is consistent with the principle that rules or laws are designed to produce an effect, and cannot be interpreted in the sense that they do not produce an effect or that their result would be clearly absurd or unreasonable. 4 3 Inter-American Commission, Report Nº 52/97, Case 11,218, Arges Sequeira Mangas, 1997 Annual Report of the IACHR, paragraphs 96 and 97. See also Report N° 55/97, paragraph 392. 4 Inter-American Court, Case of Velásquez Rodríguez, Judgment of July 29, 1988, paragraph 63