14 Commission will adopt on the merits of the case, in order to determine whether they constitute violations of the Convention. C. Timeless for the petition 56. Under Article 46(1)(b) of the American Convention, in order to be admitted a petition must be lodged within six months from the date on which the party alleging a violation of rights was notified of the final judgment of the domestic courts. The six-month rule is a guarantee of legal certainty and stability once a decision has been adopted. In the case under analysis, the IACHR has established the application of the exceptions to the exhaustion of domestic remedies requirement in keeping with Article 46(2)(b) and (c) of the American Convention. In this regard, Article 32 of the Commission´s Rules of Procedure establishes that in those cases in which the exceptions to the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies apply, the petition shall be presented within a reasonable period of time, as determined by the Commission. To that end, the Commission should consider the date on which the alleged violation of rights occurred and the circumstances of each case. 57. Related to the specific circumstances of the events alleged, the IACHR observes that they occurred during the internal armed conflict in Guatemala (1962-1996), the most violent period being from 1978 to 1983, under the de facto regimes of generals Romeo Lucas García (1978-1982) and Efraín 31 Ríos Montt (1982-1983). In addition, while the Commission considers that with the signing of the Peace Accords the internal armed conflict ended, and it became possible to seek to clarify the violations committed during the conflict, it observes that the effects of the lack of effective domestic remedies continue to this day, considering that when the petition was submitted there were still criminal proceedings that had not concluded. 58. Therefore, given the context and the characteristics of the present case, and bearing in mind the date on which the facts are alleged to have occurred, the failure to conclude the judicial investigations, the actions by the alleged victims’ next-of-kin to seek justice, and the conduct of the State, the Commission considers that the petition, filed on December 13, 2007, was presented within a reasonable time period, and that the admissibility requirement regarding time for submitting a petition should be considered satisfied. D. Duplication of proceedings and international res judicata 59. In order for a petition to be admissible, Article 46(1)(c) of the American Convention stipulates that the subject of the petition or communication shall not be pending in another international proceeding for settlement; Article 47(d) stipulates that the petition shall be inadmissible if it is substantially the same as one previously studied by the Commission or another international organization. In the instant case, the Commission notes that the parties have not alleged either of these grounds for inadmissibility, nor can they be inferred from the case file. Therefore, the requirements set forth in Articles 46(1)(c) and 47(d) of the Convention are deemed to have been satisfied. E. Colorable claim 60. For admissibility purposes, the Commission must determine whether the facts alleged, if proved, tend to establish a violation of rights, as stipulated in Article 47(b) of the American Convention or if the petition is “manifestly groundless” or “obviously out of order,” as provided in Article 47(c). The standard for evaluating these requirements is different from the standard for deciding the merits of a petition. The IACHR must conduct a prima facie evaluation to determine whether the petition establishes grounds for the apparent or potential violation of a right guaranteed by the Convention, but not to establish the existence of a violation. Such an evaluation is a summary analysis and does not imply any prejudgment on the merits. 31 IACHR, Report 13/08, Admissibility, Petition 844-05, Community of Río Negro of the Maya Indigenous People and its Members, Guatemala, March 5, 2008, para. 87.