14 4. Colorable Claim 45. Article 47(b) of the American Convention provides that the Commission will declare inadmissible those petitions that do not state facts that tend to establish a violation of the rights guaranteed in the Convention. 46. Neither the American Convention nor the Rules of Procedure of the IACHR require that the petition identify the specific rights allegedly violated by the State in a matter submitted to the Commission, though the petitioners may do so. It is up to the Commission, based on the case-law of the system, to determine in its admissibility reports which provision of the relevant inter-American instruments is applicable or could be established as having been violated, if the facts alleged are sufficiently proven. 47. In the present case, it is not for the Commission at this stage of the proceedings to decide whether or not the alleged violations of the American Convention actually took place. The IACHR made a prima facie evaluation and determined that the petition sets forth allegations which, if proven, could tend to establish possible violations of the rights guaranteed by the Convention. 48. Based on the arguments and information presented by the petitioners, the IACHR notes that there complaint concerns noncompliance with final judicial decisions handed down in favor of 852 Chilean teachers between 1993 and 1996, and that, as of this writing, those decisions have yet to be complied with, notwithstanding that in the case of two municipalities a number of payments were ostensibly made in 2008. Taking into account the arguments regarding the time elapsed since the judgments were issued and the alleged lack of effective judicial measures by which to demand their enforcement, the Commission considers that, if proven, the arguments of the petitioners could tend to describe violations of Articles 8(1) (right to a fair trial), 21 (right to property), and 25 (judicial protection) of the American Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 1(1) (obligation to respect and ensure rights) and 2 (duty to adopt domestic legal provisions) of that instrument, which will have to be evaluated in the merits stage. As regards the alleged consequences of the reputed excessive delay for the health and lives of the alleged victims, the Commission will make the corresponding analysis, as far as appropriate and in light with the provisions of Article 5 of the Convention, during the merits stage. 49. The Commission also concludes from the information provided by the parties that it does not have sufficient information or evidence from which to infer alleged violations of Article 26 of the Convention by the Chilean State. V. CONCLUSIONS 50. The Commission concludes that it is competent to examine the instant case and that the petition is admissible in accordance with Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention. 51. Based on the arguments of fact and law given above, and without prejudging the merits of the matter, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS DECIDES: