requirement is to allow domestic authorities to hear about the alleged violation of a protected right and, if appropriate, to provide a solution before it is heard in an international venue. 33.For the purposes of determining whether the conventional requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies has been met, it is necessary to specify the object of the complaint and to analyze the legal actions filed in the domestic courts with regard to the situation that is the object of the complaint. In that sense, the Commission points out that the object of the complaint refers to: 1) the alleged lack of adequate and sufficient medical care provided to the alleged victim while in jail, specially during the time just prior to her death; and 2) the alleged absence of a proper investigation of the circumstances leading to her death. ·Alleged absence of adequate and sufficient medical care 34.In this regard, the Commission notes that while serving time in jail, Mrs. Chinchilla Sandoval pursued a number of administrative and legal avenues for the purpose of obtaining proper medical care for the ailments that afflicted her. In fact, the information provided by the petitioners shows that beginning in 1997, Mrs. Chinchilla Sandoval filed a series of administrative petitions with penitentiary authorities regarding her health – for example, requests for authorization to go to medical appointments at the hospital. It is also evident from the information provided by the parties that the alleged victim filed with the Second Court of Enforcement of Sentences of Guatemala, three petitions for Early Release for Reduction of Sentence. In that regard, it would seem clear that in the aforementioned petitions for early release, the alleged victim informed the judicial authorities of her ailments as the basis for requesting her release, defining her health status as “terminally ill,” 5 and alleging that she was not being provided adequate medical care at the penitentiary. 35.Likewise, the information provided shows that as a result of one of the petitions for early release filed by the alleged victim, on May 19, 2005, the judge ordered the attending physician at the penitentiary institution to do a medical evaluation of Mrs. Chinchilla Sandoval. The medical evaluation done on August 7, 2003, as a result of the order, shows that Mrs. Chinchilla Sandoval suffered from: Diabetes mellitus, high blood pressure, fracture of the right femur, arterial occlusions in the left lower limb, cervical cancer, diabetic retinopathy, and that she was on a wheelchair and her health was deteriorating rapidly. 36.Consequently, the IACHR considers that the alleged victim made use of the means at her disposal, both legal and administrative, to obtain adequate and sufficient medical care while serving her sentence in prison. In fact, it is evident that the alleged victim made the State aware of her health which was deteriorating at an accelerated pace due to the various ailments that afflicted her. Therefore, the IACHR considers that the conventional requirement of prior Acevedo Jaramillo et al. Judgment dated February 7, 2006. Series C No 144, para. 122 and ss;Case Ximenes Lopes. Preliminary Exception. Judgment dated November 30, 2005. Series C No. 139, para. 4; among others. 5 In fact, the information provided shows that : On November 26, 2006, Mrs. Chinchilla Sandoval filed a motion for early release under extraordinary remission claiming a terminal illness. On February 14, 2003, the motion was denied and the decision stated that “although the inmate named did indeed suffer from Diabetes Mellitus, at that time the ailment could not be considered a terminal illness, given that from the information provided by the experts and from related reports, the judge infers that the person in question can receive treatment with appropriate control inside the Female Orientation Center, the same way her relatives will eventually be able to provide outside of the correctional institution.” On March 3, 2003, the appeal of that decision was denied on grounds that it was not filed within the prescribed time period. On August 6, 2003, a new petition was filed requesting Early Release Due to Terminal Illness. In a decision dated August 29, 2003, the court dismissed the petition arguing that, based on the evidence available, the illness afflicting the inmate was not in its terminal phase. The appeal of that decision was resolved by the Fourth Chamber of the Court of Appeals on September 25, 2003 when it confirmed the decision of the lower court. On March 3, 2004, Mrs. Chinchilla Sandoval again filed in the Second Criminal Enforcement Court a motion for early release under extraordinary remission, and again claiming a terminal illness.The motion was denied in a decision dated April 29, 2004, which in relevant parts stated, “it is the opinion of the judge that in order to grant the relief requested it is not necessary for the convict to suffer from a particular illness but, rather, as Article 7(c) of the Law of Remission of Sentences, it is essential for the convict to have carried out: acts of altruism, of heroism or any other humanitarian act, none of which was ever established or documented.” As stated in the resolution dated June 3, 2004, the appeal of the decision was never resolved by the Fourth Appeals Chamber due to the death of Mrs. Chinchilla. 7