In other words, the State requested that the Commission issue a decision on the merits in this case within a period of six months from March 6, 1998, or by September 6, 1998. According to the State, the decision of the Commission would be considered by the Minister of National Security when advising the President as to whether he should exercise the prerogative of mercy. Unlike other systems where the prerogative of mercy is considered part of the domestic process, in Trinidad and Tobago the international instance is used to inform the domestic process. III. GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS A. The Commission's Competence 11. Trinidad and Tobago is a State party to the American Convention, having ratified the treaty on May 28, 1991. The petition alleges violations of human rights set forth in the Convention which the Commission is competent to review. B. Procedural Admissibility of the Petition 1. Exhaustion of Domestic Remedies 12. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago stated in its response dated March 6, 1998 that: In the interests of expediency (...) notwithstanding the failure of the Applicant to first seek redress for his grievances by way of a Constitutional Motion before the domestic courts of Trinidad and Tobago, except as herein expressly provided, the State Party raises no challenge to the admissibility of this communication based on the exhaustion of domestic remedies rule (...). 13. The jurisprudence of the Inter-American Commission and Court supports the view that a remedy needs to be effective and capable of producing the result for which it was designed, and that it is not sufficient for the remedy simply to be available. (Velásquez Rodríguez,Preliminary Objections. Judgment of June 26, 1987, para. 88). For an indigent prisoner, who has exhausted all judicial appeals including recourse to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London, to be expected to file a constitutional motion, the burden of proof lies with the State to show that this remedy is effective and capable of producing the result which would make it worthwhile for the prisoner to pursue. In the opinion of the Commission, the State did not meet the burden of proof in this case and consequently the Commission finds this case admissible. 2. Timely filing 14. The petition was presented within six months of the final ruling of the appeal on conviction and sentence pursuant to Article 46(1)(b) of the Convention. Mr. Garcia's appeal against conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Court of Appeal of Trinidad and Tobago on May 22, 1997. His application for leave to appeal his conviction was dismissed by the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in London, on December 4, 1997. The petition was filed before the Commission on December 16, 1997. 3. No duplication of other international procedures 15. The petition satisfies the requirements of Article 46(1)(c) in that it is not pending settlement in another international proceeding, nor does it duplicate a petition already examined and settled by the Commission or by another international governmental organization of which the State concerned is a member. IV. CONCLUSION 16. The Commission finds that the petition is admissible having satisfied the requirements of article 46 of the American Convention. 3