2 “Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties.” In addition, Article 46(1)(a) of the Convention establishes: “Admission by the Commission of a petition or communication lodged in accordance with Articles 44 or 45 shall be subject to the following requirements: … that the remedies under domestic law have been pursued and exhausted in accordance with generally recognized principles of international law.” Meanwhile, Article 46(2) of the Convention adds: “The provisions of paragraphs 1.a and 1.b of this article shall not be applicable when: a. the domestic legislation of the State concerned does not afford due process of law for the protection of the right or rights that have allegedly been violated; b. the party alleging violation of his rights has been denied access to the remedies under domestic law or has been prevented from exhausting them; or c. there has been unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgment under the aforementioned remedies.” Then, Article 47(1)(a) of this instrument stipulates: “The Commission shall consider inadmissible any petition or communication submitted under Articles 44 or 45 if: … any of the requirements indicated in Article 46 has not been met.” Lastly, Article 61(2) of the Convention states: “In order for the Court to hear a case, it is necessary that the procedures set forth in Articles 48 4 and 50 shall have been completed.” Moreover, these provisions are closely related to the contents of the second paragraph of the Preamble to the Convention, which indicates the following: “Recognizing that the essential rights of man are not derived from one's being a national of a certain state, but are based upon attributes of the human personality, and that they therefore justify international protection in the form of a convention reinforcing or complementing the protection provided by the domestic law of the American states.” B. General considerations The above-mentioned provisions reveal that the rule of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies was established in the Convention as an essential element of the whole interAmerican system for the promotion and protection of human rights, because they establish the obligation of the alleged victim of the human right that has presumably been violated, or that of his representatives, to allege this violation before the corresponding domestic judicial bodies before doing so before the inter-American System, thus permitting or enabling these bodies to proceed in consequence, reestablishing the effective exercise and respect for the human rights in the State concerned as soon as possible,5 which is the object and purpose of the Convention, and 4 Articles that, together with Article 51, are to be found in Section 4 the Convention entitled “Procedure” of Chapter VII: “Inter-American Commission on Human Rights,” of Part II: “Means of Protection.” 5 Art. 1(1) of the Convention: “The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of