24. Based on the foregoing, the Inter-American Commission will apply to this case the exception set forth in part two of Article 46(2)(c) of the American Convention. As a result, the requirements set forth in the Convention on the exhaustion of domestic remedies and the sixmonth deadline for lodging a petition are not applicable. 25. Finally, it should be noted that the invocation of the exceptions to the rule on exhaustion of domestic remedies set forth in the American Convention is closely linked to the finding of potential violations of rights enshrined in the Convention, such as effective judicial protection. Article 46(2) of the American Convention is independent of other substantive provisions of that instrument. The determination of whether or not the exceptions to the exhaustion of domestic remedies are applicable to this case must be made beforehand, separate from the analysis of the merits. This is because the analysis of the exceptions uses different standards of assessment from those used to determine violations of Articles 8 and 25 of the American Convention. b. Duplication of proceedings and res judicata 26. The Salvadoran State did not oppose the exceptions provided for in Article 46(1)(d) and Article 47(d) of the American Convention, nor does such opposition emerge from the information in the case file. c. Characterization of the alleged events 27. The IACHR finds that the alleged events, if true, would constitute violations of rights enshrined in the American Convention. V. CONCLUSIONS 28. The Inter-American Commission concludes that it is competent to hear this case and that the petition is admissible, pursuant to Articles 46 and 47 of the American Convention. 29. Based on the foregoing de facto and de jure arguments and without prejudging the merits of the case, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS, DECIDES: 1. To declare this case admissible for the alleged violation of rights enshrined in Articles 4, 5, 7, 8, 17, 18, 19 and 25 of the American Convention. 2. To notify the parties of this decision. 3. To continue to examine the merits of the case. 4. To publish this decision and include it in its Annual Report to the OAS General Assembly. Done and signed by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights in Washington, D.C., on February 23, 2001. (Signed): Claudio Grossman, Chairman; Juan E. Méndez, First ViceChairman; Marta Altolaguirre, Second Vice-Chair; Commissioners: Robert K. Goldman, Peter Laurie, Julio Prado Vallejo, and Hélio Bicudo. 5