40. In the said report, the Commission considered that the domestic remedies had been exhausted “as regards the petitioners’ allegations concerning the presumed illegal deprivation of liberty and the prolonged preventive detention of Mr. Díaz Peña and the presumed violation of his right to the presumption of innocence,” because various remedies had been filed over the period from March 24, 2006, to May 11, 2007; “at least seven requests to review the precautionary measure of preventive detention” and “annulment based on non-compliance with the methods and conditions established by law, as well as the nullity of the expert opinion offered by the Public Prosecution Office.”26 Moreover, with regard to the detention conditions, the Commission observed that Mr. Díaz Peña’s defense counsel “ha[d] taken different steps before the prison authorities and the judges who were hearing the case to request medical care [for him and] his transfer to another prison based on the state of his health.”27 Hence, the Commission considered that the requirements of Article 46(1)(a) of the Convention had been met, “in relation to the arguments relating to the preventive detention and the detention conditions, with regard to the presumed violation of Articles 5, 7, 8 and 25”; accordingly, it concluded that the said claims were admissible in relation to the above-mentioned allegations.28 41. Conversely, the Commission stated that “[r]egarding the presumed irregularities in the criminal proceedings against the presumed victim, the case file reveal[ed] that Raúl José Díaz Peña had waived the right to appeal the judgment against him, which was published officially on June 17, 2008.”29 On this basis, it observed that, “regarding the claim of violations of due process in keeping with the right to judicial protection, the presumed victim could have appealed the judgment convicting him, and he waived this remedy of his own volition.” Consequently, it concluded that, “based on these facts, the domestic remedies ha[d] not been exhausted and that, owing to non-compliance with this requirement, the exceptions established in Article 46(2) of the American Convention were not met.”30 42. In this regard, the Court has noted that, during the proceedings before this Court, the Commission indicated that, since “the domestic remedies had not been exhausted, […] the analysis of merits did not incorporate the arguments on the irregularities in the criminal proceedings; for example, on the matter of the illegality of the way in which evidence was obtained,” and “that, in fact, the arguments on the irregularities in the criminal proceedings that could have been remedied by appealing the conviction, were inadmissible.” 43. When deciding on the admissibility of the said arguments of the representative (supra para. 37), the Court “must maintain a reasonable balance between the protection of human rights, the ultimate purpose of the system, and the legal certainty and procedural equilibrium that ensure the stability and reliability of the international protection [because, if it did not,] this would result in the 26 Cf. Admissibility Report No. 23/09, Petition 1133-05 Raúl José Díaz Peña - Venezuela, issued by the Inter-American Commission on March 20, 2009, paras. 45 to 48 (file of the proceedings before the Inter-American Commission, tome I, folios 442 and 443). 27 The Commission referred to requests made on November 15, 2006, and June 8, 2007. Cf. Admissibility Report No. 23/09, Petition 1133-05 Raúl José Díaz Peña - Venezuela, issued by the Inter-American Commission on March 20, 2009, footnote 62 (file of the proceedings before the Inter-American Commission, tome I, folio 443). 28 Cf. Admissibility Report No. 23/09, Petition 1133-05 Raúl José Díaz Peña - Venezuela, issued by the Inter-American Commission on March 20, 2009, paras. 43 and 50 (file of the proceedings before the Inter-American Commission, tome I, folios 442 to 444). 29 Admissibility Report No. 23/09, Petition 1133-05 Raúl José Díaz Peña - Venezuela, issued by the Inter-American Commission on March 20, 2009, para. 51 (file of the proceedings before the Inter-American Commission, tome I, folios 443 to 445). 30 Admissibility Report No. 23/09, Petition 1133-05 Raúl José Díaz Peña - Venezuela, issued by the Inter-American Commission on March 20, 2009, para. 51 (file of the proceedings before the Inter-American Commission, tome I, folios 443 to 445). 13