10 B. The State 20. The State argues that the petition should have been declared inadmissible. With respect to the Chañaral teachers, it says that the petitioners did not exhaust all remedies under domestic law before taking their case to the Commission since, as a general rule, any decision may be challenged by the adversely affected party before the tribunal that issued it by means of a motion for reversal or by presenting an appeal to the superior tribunal and, subsequently, motions for cassation and reconsideration of dismissal of appeal. 21. Thus, the State argues that despite having those judicial remedies at their disposal, all of which, according to the State, were adequate and effective, the petitioners omitted to invoke them to overturn the decision of June 20, 2005, by which Chañaral Magistrate’s Court accepted the exemption from compliance successfully pleaded by the respondent. 22. The State adds that apart from the remedies mentioned, the petitioners also had recourse to the appeal for protection [recurso de protección] recognized in the Constitution of Chile against acts or omissions that they regarded as violations of their basic rights. It adds that said remedy is adequate and effective and that its purpose is the adoption of immediate measures to redress harm caused; in the case in question, deprivation, abridgement, or threat to the alleged victims’ right to property. 23. The State argues that by not having invoked any of the above-mentioned remedies, the petitioners deprived the State of the possibility of resolving the matter in dispute in its internal jurisdiction. 24. In addition, the State holds that at the time the petition was lodged, there was a signed extrajudicial transaction agreement between the parties aimed at settling the suit pending before Chañaral Magistrate's Court for Labor Matters. Thus, it says, in keeping with clause 4 of the payment agreement, the municipality had proceeded to sue the Chilean Treasury so that it might grant the necessary funds. 25. In a communication of August 29, 2008, the State informed the Commission that the Municipality of Chañaral had complied fully in June 2008 with the payment agreement for the amounts owed to the teachers who had petitioned the Commission, which agreement had been signed before Chañaral Magistrate's Court, and which payment was made from the municipality's own funds. 26. The State emphasized the lack of standing to sue of the "other teachers in the same legal situation as the teachers from Chañaral since, as a generalization, it surpasses the bounds of admissibility permitted by the Convention.” The State presented no other pleadings with respect to the municipalities of Chanco, Pelluhue, Parral, Vallenar, and Cauquenes in that regard. IV. ANALYSIS A. Competence of the Commission ratione personae, ratione materiae, ratione temporis, and ratione loci 27. The petitioners have standing under Article 44 of the American Convention to lodge petitions with the Commission. The petition names as alleged victims 852 individuals in respect of whom the State undertook to observe and ensure the rights recognized in the American Convention. As to the