B. Position of the State 21. In its reply, dated October 16, 2001, the State maintained that the petitioners had not exhausted their available domestic remedies. 22. As regards Dr. Fabián Espinoza, the State pointed out that the Superior Court, in its judgment of December 13, 1999 ordered the suspension of the plenary stage of the proceedings against him, since he was a fugitive, pursuant to Articles 254 and 255 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 3 According to the State this demonstrates that domestic remedies have not been exhausted in this case. The State concludes that the Commission ought to wait until the domestic remedies have been exhausted. 23. The State also indicated that the petitioners had a second recourse available to them as regards Dr. Espinoza. They could have filed a writ of cassation as regards the judgment of the Criminal Court. This is the appropriate remedy to correct errors committed by the lower courts and to protect the legal situation that has been alleged to have been infringed. 24. As regards Dr. Montenegro, the State argued that the Commission is not called upon to resolve the guilt or innocence of the accused or to analyze the situation of the judicial proceedings, but rather to determine whether there have been violations of the rights set forth in the Convention, which it has been demonstrated did not occur. The inter-American system for the protection of human rights is subsidiary to the domestic law of the States parties and if a violation has been remedied internally by the State then the Commission cannot be seized of the matter. 25.The proceedings and the judgment of the Superior Court of Quito have been carried out with the requisite guarantees for all the parties involved in the case; the fact of obtaining an unfavorable resolution in any instance does not imply a violation of the American Convention on Human Rights; this was demonstrated when the Superior Court, in strict conformity with the national norms, declared that the statute of limitations had tolled in favor of Dr. Montenegro and at the same time, declared the plenary stage opened in the case of Dr. Espinoza, once the existence of a crime had been proven and serious grounds for presuming the accused responsible were determined. 26. The State concluded that for the international instance to act, a violation of human rights must have occurred, a violation that must be attributable to a State party of the Organization of American States. In the present case, it may be concluded that the death of Ms. Laura Albán Cornejo occurred as a result of medical malpractice, in a private hospital in the city of Quito, and that for this reason the criminal proceedings were begun after some delay. The criminal proceedings respected all the procedural guarantees, both for the accused as for the accusers, and resulted in extinguishing the cause of action against one of the accused and in opening the plenary stage of the proceedings against the other. Consequently, international responsibility cannot be attributed to Ecuador for a crime that was not committed by agents of the State, for that would be tantamount to denaturalizing the inter-American system of the protection of human rights, which acts when a violation imputable to a determined State party exists. IV. ANALYSIS OF ADMISSIBILITY A.Competence of the Commission Ratione Materiae, Ratione Personae,Ratione Temporis, and Ratione Loci 3 Article 254 provides: "Si al tiempo de dictar el auto de apertura del plenario el sindicado estuviere prófugo, el Juez, después de dictado dicho auto, ordenará la suspensión de la etapa del plenario hasta que el encausado sea aprehendido o se presentare voluntariamente. Mientras el sindicado estuviera prófugo, no se ejecutoriará el auto de apertura del plenario, auto que se le notificará personalmente en cuanto se presentare o fuere aprehendido." 4