74. The Commission further considers that it must be able to include information on specific human rights situations in its general reports on the human rights situations in the member states of the Organization of American States. The Commission must have the ability to include this information even where the situation involves a previously opened or potential future case under the individual petition system. Otherwise, the Commission would be forced to exclude from its general reports on countries the consideration of entire segments of the human rights panorama in those countries. 75. In the present case, the Commission published its Second Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Colombia before it received the petition which triggered the processing of this case under the individual petition system. The Commission could not ignore in its report the information it received relating to allegations of serious political persecution and violence against the Patriotic Union on the grounds that a petition might later be filed. Nor could its inclusion of this material imply a decision not to treat the situation subsequently under the individual petition system. 76. As a final consideration, the Commission notes that it has regularly admitted and decided cases pursuant to the individual petition system while also deciding to include information about the subject of the case in general reports.37 Lack of objection has converted these repeated decisions of the Commission into a practice accepted by the member states of the Organization of American States. The Court has also indicated that the Commission may publish information on a human rights situation in general reports while also deciding, or even sending to the Court, an individual case involving that same situation.38 The Commission does not accept the State's objection to admissibility on the grounds that the Commission has previously analyzed this case. Based on the foregoing, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 77. To declare admissible the present case. 78. To send this report on admissibility to the State of Colombia and to the petitioners. 79. To continue with the analysis of the relevant issues as they have been defined in this report in order to make a determination on the merits of the case. 80. To publish this report in the Annual Report to the General Assembly of the OAS. 37 To name just a few examples, the Commission reported generally on the Myrna Mack case in Guatemala before formally finding that case admissible pursuant to the individual petition system and, similarly, reported on the case relating to the massacre at the Honduras and La Negra farms in Colombia before deciding and publishing its final decision in that case pursuant to the individual petition system. See Report 10/96, Case 10.636 (Guatemala) (admissibility report), Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 1995, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.91, Doc. 7 rev., February 28, 1996; Fourth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.83, Doc. 16 rev., June 1, 1993 at 22; Report 2/94, Case 10.912 (Colombia), Annual Report of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 1993, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.85, Doc. 9 rev., February 11, 1994; Second Report on Colombia at 143. 38 See I/A Court H.R., Gangaram Panday Case, Preliminary Objections, Judgment of December 4, 1991. Series C No. 12, par. 33. 12