purported to have occurred within the territory of Ecuador, a state party to said treaty. The Commission is competent ratione temporis because the obligation to observe and ensure the rights protected in the American Convention was already binding upon the State at the time the events described in the petition are alleged to have occurred. Finally, the Commission has ratione materiae competence because the petition alleges violations of human rights protected by the American Convention. B. Other admissibility requirements 1. Exhaustion of domestic remedies 28. Article 46(1)(a) of the American Convention provides that admission of petitions lodged with the Inter-American Commission alleging violation of the Convention shall be subject to the requirement that the remedies under domestic law have been pursued and exhausted in accordance with generally recognized principles of international law. Article 46(2) of the Convention provides that the rule on prior exhaustion of domestic remedies does not apply when: a) b) c) the domestic legislation of the state concerned does not afford due process of law for the protection of the right or rights that have allegedly been violated; the party alleging violation of his rights has been denied access to the remedies under domestic law or has been prevented from exhausting them; or there has been unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgment under the aforementioned remedies. According to Article 31(3) of the Rules of Procedure of the IACHR, when the petitioner contends that he or she is unable to prove compliance with the rule of exhaustion of domestic remedies, it shall be up to the State concerned to show that the domestic remedies that remain to be exhausted are “adequate" for dealing with the violation alleged, in other words, that the function of those remedies in the legal system of the country is suitable to address an infringement of a legal right .17 29. To begin with, the Commission must clarify which domestic remedies need to be exhausted in the instant case. The Inter-American Court has found that the only those remedies that are adequate for addressing an alleged violation need be exhausted In the words of the Court Adequate domestic remedies are those which are suitable to address an infringement of a legal right. A number of remedies exist in the legal system of every country, but not all are applicable in every circumstance. If a remedy is not adequate in a specific case, it obviously need not be exhausted. A norm is meant to have an effect and should not be interpreted in such a way as to negate its effect or lead to a result that is manifestly absurd or unreasonable.18 30. With respect to the instant petition, it emerges from the arguments of the parties that following the events of February 27, 2001, a private indictment was brought before the police courts against four agents of the state. 19 By interlocutory order of March 30, 2001, the preliminary investigation judge admitted the private indictment against two members of the National Police: Carlos Eduardo Rivera Enríquez and Edison Patricio Yépez Espín. The trial of Edison Patricio Yépez Espín was suspended due to the fact that he remains at large. On April 19, 2002, 17 See also I/A Court H.R., Velásquez Rodríguez Case. Judgment of July 29, 1988, para. 64. 18 I/A Court H.R., Velásquez Rodríguez Case. Judgment of July 29, 1988, para. 63. 19 The petitioners cite the indictment of the prosecutor of the Second District Court of Police Justice in criminal proceeding No. 164-2001, November 27, 2001. Annex to the original petition received by the IACHR on June 20, 2002. 7