40. Given the arguments of fact and of law made by the parties and the nature of the matter before it, the Commission finds that in the instant case, the proper determination is that the petitioners’ claims of alleged violation of the rights to life, personal liberty, a fair trial, and judicial protection, could characterize violations of the rights protected under Articles 4(1), 7, 8(1), and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof. 41. Furthermore, in view of the factual evidence set out in the instant petition and pursuant to the principle of iura novit curia, the Commission must assess the possible responsibility of the State for an alleged breach of its duty to adopt provisions under domestic law provided at Article 2 of the Convention, as regards application of the police criminal justice system. Even though the state claims to have used the remedies under domestic law as the law and the American Convention prescribe and, therefore, holds that the complaint is inadmissible because it constitutes a “fourth instance”, the Commission finds that the alleged facts and arguments put forward warrant thorough analysis in the light of the Convention. 42. Since these aspects of the complaint are clearly not baseless or out of order, the Commission considers the requirements set forth in Articles 47(b) and (c) of the American Convention to be met. V. CONCLUSIONS 43. The Commission concludes that it is competent to examine the petition with respect to the alleged violations of Articles 4(1), 7, 8(1), and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof, and that the petition is admissible in accordance with the requirements contained in Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention. 44. Based on the factual and legal arguments given above and without prejudging the merits of the matter, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 1. To declare the petition admissible as regards the alleged violations of Articles 4(1), 7, 8(1), and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Articles 1(1) and 2 thereof. 2. To notify the Ecuadorian state and the petitioners of this decision. 3. To proceed with its analysis of merits in the matter. 4. To publish this decision and included in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. Approved by the Commission on the 16th day of the month of July 2009. (Signed): Luz Patricia Mejía Guerrero, President; Víctor E. Abramovich, First Vicepresident, Felipe González, Second Vice-president, Paulo Sérgio Pinheiro, Florentín Meléndez, and Víctor E. Abramovich, members of the Commission. 10