a summary prima facie evaluation that does not entail any prejudgment or anticipation of an opinion on the merits. Its own Rules of Procedure reflect this distinction between the evaluation it must perform for the purposes of finding a petition admissible and that required to determine whether in effect there is State responsibility, on establishing clearly differentiated stages for examining admissibility and the merits. 46. In the instant case, the petitioners allege violation, by the State, of Articles 4, 5, 8(1), 17(1), 19, 24, 25, and 26, in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention. 47. Having reviewed the information submitted by both parties, the Commission finds that the petitioners have made allegations that are not "manifestly groundless" or "obviously out of order " and that, if confirmed as true, could constitute violations of Articles 4, 5, 8(1), 17(1), 19, 24, 25, and 26 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same international instrument. 48. In particular, the Commission considers that it should note that the facts of the instant petition are related fundamentally to the alleged responsibility of the State of Honduras for the lack of social security, health, and labor measures to guarantee the working conditions of the Miskitu divers in the department of Gracias a Dios. This omission, according to the facts alleged, meant that the Miskitu divers – a substantial part of the Miskitu indigenous people who live in the department of Gracias a Dios – have suffered decompression syndrome, causing partial or permanent disability, and even death, on a large scale and to a critical extent, jeopardizing the very integrity of the Miskitu people in Honduras. In the instant case, the facts alleged tend to establish a violation of the rights set forth at Articles 4 and 5 of the American Convention, in addition to Article 19 with respect to the child Licar Méndez Gutiérrez. 49. The facts of the case tend to establish a violation of Articles 8, 25, and 24 of the American Convention, in relation to the arguments on denial of justice. Moreover, the facts alleged tend to establish a violation of Article 17(1) of the American Convention considering the consequences for the family and the community of the disability and death of its members, together with the lack of medical care and rehabilitation services, denial of justice, lack of reparation, and consequent impossibility of leading a dignified life. 50. In addition, the IACHR observes that the facts described by the petitioners could tend to establish a violation of Article 26 of the American Convention, due to the alleged omission on the part of the State to adopt measures to ensure labor and social security conditions for the workers engaged in underwater fishing, especially the Miskitu divers in the department of Gracias a Dios. The Commission observes that the actions or omissions of various state organs could have had an aggravated effect on the Miskitu divers of Gracias a Dios, considering that not only would their labor and social security rights have been curtailed, but moreover the survival of the lion’s share of the Miskitu people could have been put at risk. Accordingly, and without prejudging on the merits, the IACHR considers it relevant to incorporate Article 26 of the American Convention in the analysis on the merits in the instant case. 51. In addition, by application of the principle of iura novit curia the Commission observes that the facts alleged tend to establish a violation of Article 6(2) of the American Convention because the State’s failure to guarantee the Miskitu divers’ working conditions would mean that they were subject to labor exploitation and forced labor on being compelled to work more hours that permissible, descend to greater depths, and be submerged for longer times at the risk of suffering decompression syndrome or death.