Allegedly, the Law does not limit itself to monetary compensation, but also involves investigation into the circumstances and places of the deaths. However, it is only possible to locate the bodies and investigate the circumstances of the guerrillas' death if evidence is available in the area to be investigated. In the absence of such evidence, it is impossible to locate the bodies and hence to identify them and determine the circumstances of death. For such purposes, the State denies that it has complete military reports in which the burial sites of these individuals and the circumstances in which they died may be systematically set forth. Based on these allegations, the State considers that the Commission should order the file closed, pursuant to Article 48(1)(b) and (c) of the Convention. 33. With respect to the petitioners' allegation that comprehensive reparation of the violation requires the investigation thereof and punishment of the perpetrators, the State alleges that such punishment is rendered impossible by the existence of the Amnesty Act enacted in 1979, which remains in force. It underscores the fact that the Law was “extremely important in the process of replacing the military regime and restoring the country to democracy [and] it was enacted owing to the existence of broad national political consensus.” The State adds that the Amnesty Act benefited both sides of the Araguaia conflict. 34. In a note received on August 31, 1998, the Government presented its final arguments. To summarize, the State alleged that: (1) Law Nº 9140/95 represented adequate response to the issue of the disappearances through its acknowledgement of State responsibility, indemnification, acknowledgement that those who disappeared were dead, and its attempt to locate and identify their bodies; (2) secret documents must be submitted in accordance with the provisions governing classification of secret documents, and these documents may be requested through the judicial process; (3) regarding investigation of the circumstances of the deaths, the Amnesty Act extinguished the individual criminal responsibility of the persons involved on both sides of the conflict; (4) the aforementioned law is the result of broad national consensus in the sense that it enabled democracy to be restored in the early 1980s. In conclusion, the Government requests that the case be ordered closed, pursuant to Article 48(1) of the American Convention. 35. With respect to the violations alleged by the petitioners, the State acknowledges its responsibility for the deaths of the guerrillas, but it considers that the petitioners have the means to obtain adequate reparation for these violations through the application of Law Nº 9140/95. The State denies that the Amnesty Act and Law No. 9140/95 foster impunity in Brazil. 36. To summarize, with respect to the petition's admissibility requirements, the State alleges that domestic remedies were not exhausted and that new facts –mainly the enactment of Law Nº 9140 and the work of the Special Commission established by it– imply that the alleged violations can no longer be characterized as such. Based on these arguments, the State requests that the case be ordered closed or declared inadmissible. In terms of the merits, the State alleges that it has made adequate reparation for the violations and that it is not infringing upon the right to truth nor fostering impunity. IV. ANALYSIS OF ADMISSIBILITY A. Competence ratione personae, ratione materiae, ratione temporis, and ratione loci of the Commission 37. The Commission has jurisdiction in this case by reason of the matter involved because the facts described, if their veracity is confirmed, would constitute violations of the American Declaration and the American Convention, as is discussed below. 38. The facts described took place from 1972, a time when the State had not ratified the American Convention. However, all member states of the Organization of American States 8 are subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission which, pursuant to Article 20 of its Statute, shall examine communications that deal with alleged violations of the American Declaration. 8 Brazil is a founding member of the OAS, as it signed the Charter of the Organization in 1948 and deposited its instrument of ratification in 1950. 6