insofar as it refers to alleged violations of Articles 20, 27(1), and 27(2) of the American Convention. Finally, the Commission decides to notify the parties, make this report on admissibility public, and publish it in its Annual Report. II. PROCESSING BEFORE THE COMMISSION A. Processing of the petition 6. The Commission received the petition on July 19, 2005, and assigned it number 844-05. On May 4, 2006, the IACHR transmitted a copy of the pertinent parts to the State, asking it to submit its answer within two months, in keeping with Article 30(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (hereinafter “the Rule of Procedure”). 7. On July 10, 2006, the State presented its answer to the complaint, which was forwarded to the petitioners on July 13, 2006; they were given one month to submit observations. On August 24, 2006, the petitioners informed the Commission that the information sent had been received in incomplete form, and asked that it be sent again. On August 28, 2006, the IACHR forwarded the State’s answer to the petitioners, and gave them one month to submit observations. 8. On September 14, 2006, the petitioners asked the IACHR for a working meeting during the 126th regular period of sessions. The request was rejected due to the large number of meetings already scheduled. 9. In a note dated September 14, 2006, received on September 29, 2006, the petitioners submitted their observations, and on October 5, 2006, these were forwarded to the State, which was asked to submit its observations within one month. 10. In a note dated November 8, 2006, received the next day, the State requested a 10-day extension for submitting its observations; which was granted in a note of November 22, 2006. In a note dated November 30, 2006, received on December 5, 2006, the State submitted its observations, and on December 8, 2006, the IACHR transmitted the pertinent parts of the information submitted by the State to the petitioners, and asked that they submit their observations within one month. 11. The petitioners submitted their observations in a note dated December 26, 2006, received on January 9, 2007. 12. On January 5, 2007, the petitioners asked the IACHR for a working meeting during the 127th regular period of sessions. The request was rejected due to the large number of meetings already scheduled. 13. On January 12, 2007, the IACHR forwarded to the State the latest response from the petitioners, and asked that it submit its observations within one month. On February 21, 2007, the State requested an extension, and on March 1, 2007, the IACHR granted it a 15-day extension. 14. On February 28, 2007, the State submitted its observations, which were forwarded to the petitioners on March 15, 2007. On April 2, 2007, the State submitted additional information, which was forwarded to the petitioners on April 9, 2007; they were given one month to send in observations. 15. In a note dated April 11, 2007, received on April 13, 2007, the petitioners requested an extension for submitting their observations, and on April 19, 2007, the IACHR granted the petitioners a 15-day extension. 2

Select target paragraph3