34. Thus, the Convention indicates that the “petition or communication lodged,” the “pertinent portions” of which are forwarded to the State concerned, which means that it is the petition that should indicate compliance with the requirement of the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies or the impossibility of this due to any of the circumstances established in Article 46(2), also transcribed above, so that the State may respond and potentially file the corresponding objection, which means that it is when the petition is lodged that this should already have occurred. 35. This interpretation is supported by Article 46(1)(b) of the Convention, which indicates that the petition should have been: “lodged within a period of six months from the date on which the party alleging violation of his rights was notified of the final judgment.” 36. Evidently, it should be understood that the said final judgment is the one delivered on the final remedy that was filed, without there being any other that could be filed. In other words, the time frame indicated to lodge the petition is calculated from the moment of notification of the final judgment of the domestic authorities or courts on the remedies filed before them, which are, consequently, those that may have given rise to the international responsibility of the State, which obviously means that, when the petition is “lodged,” they should have been exhausted. 37. The foregoing is reinforced by the content of the said Article 46(1)(a) indicating the requirement that “the remedies under domestic law have been pursued and exhausted”; in other words it alludes to something that has already happened before the lodging of the corresponding petition. F. Peremptory rule 38. that: In accordance with the foregoing, it should also be recalled that Article 47(a) stipulates “The Commission shall consider inadmissible any petition or communication submitted under Articles 44 or 45 if: (a) any of the requirements indicated in Article 46 has not been met.” 39. In other words, this provision is peremptory. The Commission must declare inadmissible “any petition or communication submitted” regarding which the domestic remedies have not been exhausted or that does not comply with one of the situations established in Article 46(2). 40. Evidently, the Commission must comply with the Convention and cannot, for example, declare a petition or communication admissible even though, when it was “lodged,” it had not met the requirement of the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies but rather had met this requirement at the time that it was “admitted,” because if it does so, it would render it without any real or practical effects, beyond initiating a procedure, but not the litigation. 41. Indeed, if it is not required that domestic remedies have been exhausted before the petition is lodged, or that the petition be lodged within six months of notification of the final judgment, it would not be possible to require “that the subject of the petition or communication is not pending in another international proceeding for settlement,” or “that the petition contains the name, nationality, profession, domicile, and signature of the person or persons or of the legal representative of the entity lodging the petition,” requirements that are also established in Article 46 of the Convention, because all this could be remedied subsequently and, in any 11