proceeding for settlement (Article 46.1.c. of the American Convention) nor substantially the same as one previously studied by the Commission or by another international organization (Article 47.d. of the Convention). Consequently, the petition satisfies both requirements in the referenced instrument. 4. Characterization of alleged facts 58. For the purposes of admissibility, the Commission needs to decide if the petition presents facts that could characterize a violation, as is required by Article 47.b. of the American Convention. Likewise, the IACHR must determine if the petition is “manifestly groundless” or is “obviously out of order,” according to subsection (c) of the same article. The standard for assessing admissibility differs from the one used to decide the merits of a petition. For admissibility purposes, the Inter-American Commission need only make a prima facie analysis whether the petitioners establish the apparent or potential violation of a right guaranteed under the American Convention and not to establish the existence of a violation. Such an examination is a summary analysis that does not imply any prejudgment or preliminary opinion on the merits. The Inter-American Commission’s own Rules, establishing one phase for admissibility and another for the merits, reflects this distinction between the evaluation conducted by the InterAmerican Commission for the purpose of declaring a petition admissible and the one required to establish whether there has been violations impugnable to the State.8 59. In the present case the IACHR considers that the alleged facts, if proven, could characterize possible violations of the rights guaranteed under Articles 1.1, 4.1, 5.1 and 8.1 of the American Convention. Likewise, the Commission observes that the alleged lack of access to justice could as well characterize a violation of Article 24 of the American Convention. 60. Additionally, in application of the principle iura novit curia, the Commission will analyze, in the merits stage, if there is a possible violation of Article 25 of the American Declaration. 61. The IACHR considers the information presented does not offer sufficient characterization of a violation of the rights protected under Article 22 of the American Convention. 8 See IACHR, Report N° 31/03, Case 12.195, Mario Alberto Jara Oñate et al., Chile, March 7, 2003, paragraph 41; Report N° 4/04, Petition 12.324, Rubén Luis Godoy, Argentina, February 24, 2004, paragraph 43; Petition 429-05, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia et al., Chile, April 23, 2007, paragraph 54; Petition 581-05, Víctor Manuel Ancalaf LLaupe, Chile, May 2, 2007, paragraph 46. 13