36. There is nothing in the record to suggest that the subject matter of the petition is pending in another international proceeding or that it is substantially the same as one previously studied by it or by another international organization. Accordingly, the Commission concludes that the requirements established in Article 46(1)(c) and 47(d) of the Convention are met. 4. Colorable claim 37. The Commission considers that there is no evidence of any lack of grounds for, or irrelevancy of, the complaint received. It further considers that, prima facie, the claims of the petitioners regarding the alleged violation of the rights to a fair trial and judicial protection of the families of the 107 inmates who died as a result of the fire at San Pedro Sula Prison in May 2004 could eventually constitute a violation of the rights guaranteed by Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention, in connection with Article 1(1) of the same instrument. The Commission also finds that, prima facie, the facts alleged by the petitioners could constitute violations of Articles 4 and 5 of the American Convention, in connection with the 107 persons deprived of liberty who died during the aforesaid fire, given the possible failure by agents of the State to adopt preventive measures and guarantees for protection of their right to life, as well as with regard to the conditions of confinement at the time of the blaze. Also, based on the principle iura novit curia, the Commission will analyze a possible violation of Article 7 of the American Convention. All of the foregoing in conjunction with the obligation under Article 1(1) of the Convention. V. CONCLUSIONS 38. The IACHR concludes that it is competent to take up the complaint presented by the petitioners concerning alleged violation of Articles 4, 5, 8, and 25 of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of the alleged victims and their families. Also, based on the principle iura novit curia, the Commission concludes that the petition is admissible for the alleged violation of Article 7 of the Convention. 39. Based on the factual and legal arguments given above and without prejudging the merits in the matter, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 1. To declare the instant case admissible as regards the alleged violations of rights protected in Articles 4, 5, 8, 25, and 1(1) of the American Convention; to the detriment of the alleged victims and their families. Also, based on the principle iura novit curia, the Commission concludes that the petition is admissible for the alleged violation of Article 7 of the Convention. 2. To notify the parties of this decision; 3. To continue with its analysis of merits in the matter, and 4. To publish this decision and include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. Done and signed at the headquarters of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in the city of Washington, D.C., on the 17 th day of October, 2008. (Signed): Paolo G. Carozza, Chairman; Luz Patricia Mejía Guerrero, First Vice-Chairwoman; Felipe González, Second ViceChairman; Sir Clare K. Roberts, Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Florentín Meléndez, andVíctor E. Abramovich, members of the Commission. 8