43. The proper recourse for this allegation was proceedings N 24079 (“for maltreatment”), which also dealt with the alleged removal of a medical report evidencing the torture allegedly inflicted on the petitioner. Domestic jurisdiction was exhausted with the ruling of the Supreme Court of Justice of the Nation on April 15, 1997, dismissing the petitioner’s complaint alleging that extraordinary recourse had been denied. Consequently, the Commission holds that the requirement has been met in this aspect of the case. Regarding the alleged denial of a fair trial 44. The proper recourse for this allegation was proceedings N 32989, begun by the petitioner on February 11, 1995, “for irregularities in the proceedings [24079, allegedly committed by unidentified police and judicial officers.]” The petitioner had claimed that “no procedural measure was ever ordered,” but in a later communication he admitted that the magistrate responsible for Investigating Court N 30 dismissed the complaint “because no crime existed.” The petitioner holds that, “I was legally unable to appeal against this resolution, and so to date it is final and the case has been FILED” [emphasis in the original]. Since State has not challenged that claim, in connection with these proceedings the domestic remedies are deemed to have been exhausted. Regarding the alleged threats made by police personnel 45. The proper recourse for this was proceedings N 25156, the purpose of which was to address the alleged threats made by members of the Federal Police. It was “opened on March 14, 1989, and, on March 29, 1989 (15 days later), it was closed without any investigation being conducted or procedural measure ordered under a provisional dismissal ruling that, to date, is final and the proceedings have been FILED” [emphasis in the original]. 46. Unlike the allegations regarding arbitrary arrest and torture, in this regard the petitioner has not supplied evidence to indicate his exhaustion of the available domestic remedies. The petitioner has not claimed to have appealed against the decision in proceedings N 25156, nor has he claimed that additional remedies do not exist. The State, in contrast, has alleged the petitioner’s global failure to exhaust domestic remedies. Consequently, the Commission concludes that this aspect of the case is inadmissible because said remedies have not been exhausted. 47 In summary, for the purposes of processing this case, the domestic remedies have been exhausted in connection with the allegations of arbitrary arrest, torture, and the denial of a fair trial. They have not been exhausted as regards the alleged threats made by members of the police. b. Filing period 48 The following section analyzes compliance with this requirement in respect of the proceedings in which the domestic remedies were deemed to have been exhausted. Under Article 46(1)(b) of the Convention and Article 38(1) of the Commission’s Regulations, the deadline for submitting petitions is six months after the date on which notice of the “final ruling” is served. The petition in this case was submitted on August 24, 1994, and that will be used as the starting date for calculating compliance with this requirement. Regarding the alleged arbitrary arrest 49. The Commission’s file does not contain a copy of the final ruling in proceedings N 24519 (for fraud), during which the petitioners’ preventive custody was ordered. But the petitioner has maintained that, “A provisional dismissal was ordered in October 1988, and that ruling has been 7