… 3. If the petition does not meet the requirements of these Rules of Procedure, the Commission may request that the petitioner or his or her representative complete them in accordance with Article 26.2 of these Rules.”58 56. This signifies that the information required to “process” or “consider” the pertinent petition must refer to the measures taken to exhaust the domestic remedies or the impossibility to do so. In other words, the petition must describe what has been done to exhaust the remedies in question or that it was impossible to exhaust them and, if it does not mention anything in this regard, the Commission should require the petitioner to do this, in keeping with the regulatory warning that, to the contrary, the petition will not be considered. 57. Accordingly, the Commission, acting through its Executive Secretariat, must undertake an initial control of conventionality of the petition; comparing it against the provisions of the Convention and the said Rules of Procedure. In other words, it must determine whether it meets the corresponding requirements at the time it is “lodged” and if it verifies that the petition does not meet them, it must require it to do so. To the contrary, the logic and need for the “initial processing” of the petition are incomprehensible as is the reason why the petitioner should be asked to complete the requirements indicating the measures taken to exhaust the domestic remedies or the impossibility of doing so. 58. Thus, it is the Commission’s Rules of Procedure which establish that it is the petitions submitted to the Commission that must include the information on the measures taken – evidently before their submission – to exhaust the remedies of the domestic jurisdiction or the impossibility of doing this, which must be duly substantiated. This regulatory requirement, which reflects the interpretation that the Commission itself makes of the articles of the Convention, is of the greatest relevance and it is compliance with this that permits litigation to be established subsequently on the specific case. B. The forwarding of the petition to the State concerned 59. Also, regarding the forwarding of the petition to the State concerned, the Commission’s Rules of Procedure confirm the said interpretation; that is, that the exhaustion of domestic remedies is a requirement that must be met before the petition is lodged before the Commission and must be reflected in the petition submitted to the Commission. 60. Indeed, Article 30(1) and (2) of the said Rules of Procedure establishes: “Admissibility procedure. 1. The Commission, through its Executive Secretariat, shall process the petitions that meet the requirements set forth in Article 28 of these Rules of Procedure. 2. For this purpose, it shall forward the relevant parts of the petition to the State in question. The request for information made to the State shall not constitute a prejudgment with regard to any decision the Commission may adopt on the admissibility of the petition.59 63. In this regard, it should be recalled that what is forwarded to the State in question, as decided by the Commission, should be the relevant part of the petition itself and this, provided it meets with, among others, the requirement for information on the measures taken to exhaust the remedies of the domestic jurisdiction or the impossibility of doing so. In other words, the forwarding of the petition is in order if it complies with the said requirement. 58 Art. 29(1) and 3. 59 Art. 30(1) and (2). 15