8 Similarly, it should be recalled that it is undeniable that the Convention does not include a time frame for the Commission to rule on whether or not the petitions or communications lodged before it are admissible; and, consequently, the Convention did not anticipate the situations arising from a delay in this ruling. However, it may be supposed that the wording of the articles cited tacitly considered a certain simultaneity or, at least, a relatively short lapse between the lodging of the petition or communication and the decision on its admissibility. Based on the foregoing, attention may also be drawn to the fact that the said provisions expressly refer to “a petition or communication lodged;” in other words, they refer to a procedural action carried out at a certain moment that reveals its author’s intention. That is to say, it cannot be modified by the latter, unless the author requests that it be considered that the action has not been taken. Second, it should also be considered that, it is with regard to that action, the “petition or communication lodged” that the Commission’s decision on whether or not it is admissible should be made. That is, the Commission must refer to this exactly as it was lodged or completed; the latter at the request of the Commission itself. From all the foregoing, it can be inferred that the said petition or communication is only admissible if, at the time it is lodged or has been completed, the domestic remedies relating to the presumed violation of the human rights that it alleged have been exhausted. Furthermore, this is revealed by the provisions of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure which were adopted by the Commission itself and that, therefore, reflect how it has interpreted the pertinent norms of the Convention. Reference has already been made to these Rules of Procedure, 22 indicating that they leave no doubt that the person obliged to previously exhaust domestic remedies is the person who lodges the pertinent petition or communication before the Commission, and that it is also this person, therefore, who must prove that this requirement has been met at that time, or when the Commission requests that the petition or communication be completed during its initial processing. However, these Rules of Procedure also indicate that it is the petitioner who may allege the impossibility of proving compliance with the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies,23 which can only be done in the respective petition, or with the information completing it. Furthermore, attention should also be drawn to the fact that, according to the said Rules of Procedure, only “the petitions” that meet the pertinent requirements will be processed, including the one relating to the prior exhaustion of domestic remedies, which should obviously have occurred before the petitions were lodged or when they were completed at the request of the Executive Secretariat.24 Lastly, it appears undeniable that, as established by the Commission’s Rules of Procedure,25 when a petition is lodged before it, the exact date on which the domestic 22 Arts. 28(8) and 29(3) of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure, transcribed above. 23 Art. 31(3) of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure: “When the petitioner contends that he or she is unable to prove compliance with the requirement indicated in this article, it shall be up to the State concerned to demonstrate to the Commission that the remedies under domestic law have not been previously exhausted, unless that is clearly evident from the record.” 24 Art. 30(1) of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure: “The Commission, through its Executive Secretariat, shall process the petitions that meet the requirements set forth in Article 28 of these Rules of Procedure.” 25 Art. 32 of the Commission’s Rules of Procedure: “1. The Commission shall consider those petitions that are lodged within a period of six-months following the date on which the alleged victim has been notified of the decision that exhausted the domestic remedies. 2. In those cases in which the exceptions to the requirement of prior exhaustion of domestic remedies are applicable, the petition shall be presented within a