41. There is nothing in the record to suggest that the subject matter of the petition is pending in another international proceeding for settlement, or is substantially the same as one previously studied by the Commission or by another international human rights body. The Commission, therefore, concludes that the requirements established in Article 46(1) (c) are met. 4. Characterization of the alleged facts 42. The Commission notes that the petition raises important questions regarding the rights of members of a family to be protected from allegedly “arbitrary” actions of the State. The facts concern violations allegedly committed against members of a family by a de facto government in which members of the family were destroyed and eliminated by members of the military dictatorship who cooperated and collaborated with neighboring militaries. The facts concern specifically the forced disappearance of Maria Claudia Gelman, the suppression of the identity of Maria Macarena, the daughter of Maria Claudia and Marcelo Gelman, the lack of effective judicial response as regards the rights of Juan Gelman and his relatives and the torments suffered by the victims and their relatives as a result of the events that purportedly occurred in this case. 43. Following the return to democracy in 1995, access to justice continued to be barred by an Amnesty law adopted by the democratic state and reportedly ratified in a referendum by the Uruguayan people. Given the Commission’s substantial jurisprudence on the issue of amnesty laws, the Commission decides that, at a minimum, the petitioners’ claims describe acts that, if proven to be true, could tend to establish a violation of the rights of Juan Gelman and his family protected by Articles 1(1), 2, 8 and 25 of the American Convention; thus, the admissibility requirements of Article 47(b) have been satisfied. 44. For the purposes of admissibility, the Commission concludes that there is sufficient evidence that the allegations regarding the removal of Maria Macarena from her legitimate family and country and giving her in adoption to a police officer in another country for 23 years, if proven, could tend to establish violations of Articles 1(1), 3, 11, 17, 18 and 19 of the American Convention, obligations which the State owed to Maria Macarena and her mother, Maria Claudia Gelman. In addition, the petitioners include further allegations, that, if proven to be true, could tend to establish a violation of Articles I, III, IV, V and XII of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons for failure to prevent, punish and eliminate the practice of forced disappearance within its jurisdiction, Articles 1, 6, 8 and 11 of the InterAmerican Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture for failure to prevent torture and failure to punish those responsible for torture and to extradite them to a jurisdiction where they will be tried, and lastly, Articles I, XVII, XVIII, XXV and XXVI of the American Declaration on the Rights and Duties of Man for possible violations of the right to life, right to a juridical personality, right to justice, right to protection against arbitrary arrest and right to a fair trial in the period August 24, 1976 to April 19, 1985, when Uruguay ratified the American Convention. Since this case involves the forced disappearance of Maria Claudia Gelman and it is not clear whether Ms. Gelman was killed prior to April 19, 1985 (the date of Uruguay’s ratification of the American Convention) or thereafter, both Articles I of the American Declaration and Articles 4, 5 and 7 of the American Convention in conjunction with Article 1(1) are implicated. V. CONCLUSION 45. The Commission has determined in the instant report that it is competent to take up the complaint lodged by the petitioners alleging violations of their human rights under multiple instruments, but, in particular, the rights to a fair trial and judicial protection (Articles 8 and 25) as regards Juan Gelman and his family, in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 of the American Convention, as regards Maria Claudia Gelman, and further violations of the rights set forth in Articles 1(1), 3, 11, 17, 18 and 19 of the American Convention, as regards, Maria Macarena Gelman. In addition, if the allegations are proven true, the State may be found responsible for violations of Articles I, III, IV, V and XII of the Inter-American Convention on Forced Disappearance of Persons, Articles 1, 6, 8 and 11 of the Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture and lastly, Articles I, XVII, XVIII, XXV and XXVI of the American 10