establishing the requirements that criollo and indigenous communities alike must meet to benefit from this land distribution proposal. III. ANALYSIS OF ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence of the Commission Ratione Personae, Ratione Loci, Ratione Temporis, and Ratione Materiae. 67. The petitioners are entitled by Article 44 of the American Convention to present complaints before the Commission. The petition names as the alleged victims the members of the indigenous communities belonging to the Wichi (Mataco), Iyojwaja (Chorote), Nivacklé (Chulupí), Quom (Toba) and Tapy´y (Tapiete) indigenous peoples who make up the Lhaka Honhat Association and who live on fiscal lots 14 and 55, with respect to whom the State of Argentina is committed to respect and guarantee the rights enshrined in the American Convention. The Commission notes that Argentina is a State Party to the American Convention, having ratified it on September 5, 1984. In terms of passive jurisdiction ratione personae, the IACHR also notes that it is a general principle of international law that the State is responsible for the acts of all its organs, including those of the judiciary. It is responsible as well for the acts of the provinces that make up the federal State, by virtue of universally recognized general principles of international law and Articles 1, 2 and 28 of the American Convention. The Commission therefore has jurisdiction to examine the petition. 68. The Commission has jurisdiction ratione loci to hear this petition inasmuch as it alleges violations of rights protected in the American Convention that took place within the territory of a State party to that treaty. 69. The Commission has jurisdiction ratione temporis because the events alleged in the petition took place when the obligation to respect and guarantee the rights established in the Convention was already in force for the State. 70. Finally, the Commission has jurisdiction ratione materiae because the petition complains of possible violations of human rights protected under the American Convention. 71. With respect to the allegations of violations of the American declaration, in light of Articles 23 and 49 of its Rules of Procedure, the Commission in principle has jurisdiction ratione materiae