made inquiries with the purpose of assisting in the clarification of the facts. The petitioners further argue that more than four years have elapsed since the murder of the alleged victim and the case has not progressed beyond its investigation phase, without any signs to date that the perpetrators and/or abettors of the crime can be identified. 41. When a State alleges that domestic remedies have not been exhausted, it is up to the State to identify those that must be exhausted and demonstrate their effectiveness. In this case, the burden of proof that said remedies have indeed been exhausted, or that one of the exceptions provided for by Article 46 (2) of the American Convention applies, is transferred to the petitioners. 42. Without examining the arguments offered by the parties regarding the alleged violation of the right to due process and judicial protection, the Commission notes that more than four years have passed since María Isabel Véliz Franco was found dead and at the time of the writing of this report the representatives of the State have not provided specific information regarding the identification and punishment of those potentially responsible for her death. The Commission likewise notes that the record in the IACHR does not contain information about recent proceedings carried out by the State or on any progress made towards clarifying the facts and sanctioning those responsible, in particular since 2005 onward. The Guatemalan State limits itself to mentioning some of the proceedings carried out in the investigation of the facts, but does not offer specific information that would lead to the conclusion that the investigation is appropriate and effective, as required for the clarification of the facts. 43. According to the information available to the IACHR, the Commission also makes the preliminary observation that there has been an unwarranted delay with respect to jurisdiction. 9 This conflict of jurisdiction, which lasted nearly seven months, constitutes a contributing factor to the unwarranted delay in the identification and sanction of those allegedly responsible for the crime. 44. The Inter-American Commission also notes that the petitioners allege that the facts of the instant case occurred within the context of numerous homicides and disappearances of women in Guatemala, the majority of which constitute unsolved cases by the state authorities, perpetuating impunity for acts of violence against women. 45. In the light of all the foregoing, and of the evidence in the record, the Inter-American Commission finds – for purposes of admissibility – that there has been an unwarranted delay in the decisions of the Guatemalan courts regarding the facts reported. Consequently, the IACHR finds that the exception to the exhaustion of domestic remedies provided for by Article 46(2)(c) of the American Convention is applicable. 2. Timeliness of the petition 46. Regarding the requirement provided for by Article 46(1)(b) of the Convention, according to which the petition must be filed within a period of six months from the date on which the party alleging violation of his rights was notified of the final judgment exhausting domestic remedies, the Commission considers that compliance with this time period is not applicable either, since the petition was lodged within the reasonable time period provided for by Article 32(2) of its Rules of Procedure for those cases in which there has been no final judgment at the time of the filing of the petition. 3. Duplication of proceedings and international res judicata 47. The record of the petition does not contain information indicating that the instant case is pending in another international proceeding for settlement, or that it has been previously decided by the Inter-American Commission. Therefore, the IACHR concludes that the 9 IACHR, Report No. 54/01, Case 12,051, Maria Da Penha Fernandes, Brazil, April 16, 2001, para. 32 8