66. Based on the preceding, the Commission considers that the petitioners are exempt from exhausting the domestic remedies because the enforcement of judgment process constituted an unjustified delay under the provisions of Article 46.2 (c) of the American Convention. C. Deadline for submitting the petition 67. Article 46.1(b) of the Convention provides that for a petition to be admissible, it must be lodged within a period of six months from the date on which the interested party was notified of the final judgment in the domestic jurisdiction. This rule does not apply when the Commission finds that any of the exceptions to the exhaustion of domestic remedies established in Article 46.2 of the Convention is applicable. In such cases, the Commission must decide if the petition was filed within a reasonable period of time in accordance with Article 32 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure. 68. The Peruvian State alleged that this petition was not filed within the prescribed period of time, using October 25, 1993, as the date to determine the deadline. As the parties have asserted and the information contained in the case file confirms, this is the date in which the Supreme Court of Justice issued its decision on the amparo petition siding with the alleged victims. This is precisely the decision the petitioners allege has not been enforced. Therefore, the rights violations alleged by the petitioners would have taken place after the judgment was issued, given that the purpose of the petition was not the amparo proceeding – which was favorable to them – but the lack of enforcement of the final judgment. In that respect, the Commission considers that there are no grounds for this argument. 69. Taking into consideration the active role assumed by the alleged victims in the enforcement of judgment process as well as the fact that, because of its continued nature, the violation still remains unresolved, the Commission considers that the three petitions grouped together were submitted within a reasonable period of time. D. Duplication of proceedings and international res judicata 70. Article 46.1(c) of the Convention establishes that the admissibility of petitions is subject to the requirement that the matter "is not pending in another international proceeding for settlement” and Article 47.d of the Convention establishes that the Commission will not accept a petition that is substantially the same as one previously studied by the Commission or by another international organization. In this 23