Chapter 3 • The Major Regional Human Rights Instruments and the Mechanisms for Their Implementation v the competence of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights: the Inter-American Commission is composed of seven members elected in their personal capacity (arts. 34 and 36(1)) whose main functions are to “promote respect for and defence of human rights” by, inter alia, (1) developing an awareness of human rights in the Americas; (2) making recommendations to Governments of the member States, when it considers such action advisable; (3) preparing such studies and reports as it considers advisable in the performance of its duties; and, (4) taking action on petitions and other communications pursuant to its authority under the Convention (art. 41(a), (b), (c) and (f)). The right of individual petition to the Commission is mandatory under the Convention, according to which “any person or group of persons, or any non-governmental entity legally recognized in one or more member States of the Organization [of American States] may lodge petitions ... containing denunciations or complaints of violation of this Convention by a State Party” (art. 44). On the other hand, inter-State complaints require a specific declaration whereby the State concerned recognizes the competence of the Commission to examine communications brought against another State party having made the same declaration (art. 45(1) and (2)). The admission of an individual petition or inter-State communication submitted to the Commission is subject to several requirements, such as the exhaustion of domestic remedies rule (art. 46(1)(a)). Moreover, the petition or communication must be lodged within six months from the date on which the alleged victim was notified of the final judgement, and the subject of the complaint must not be pending in another international proceeding for settlement (art. 46(1)(b) and (c)). Individual petitions must of course also contain information such as the name, address and signature of the alleged victim or his or her legal representative (art. 46(1)(d)). The exhaustion of domestic remedies rule is not, however, applicable (a) where the domestic legislation “does not afford due process of law for the protection of the right or rights that have allegedly been violated”; (b) where the alleged victim has been denied access to domestic remedies; and (c) where there has been “unwarranted delay in rendering a final judgement” (art. 46(2)). If a petition or communication does not fulfil these conditions or if, for instance, it is “manifestly groundless”, the Commission declares the petition or communication concerned inadmissible (art. 47). Otherwise, it shall be declared admissible, which implies that the Commission will proceed to request more information from the parties in order to be enabled to make a more in-depth analysis of the complaints (art. 48(1)(a)). It can also make an on-the-spot investigation and hear oral statements in addition to written submissions (art. 48(1)(d) and (e)). At this stage the Commission can also declare the petition or communication inadmissible or out of order or unsubstantiated (art. 48(1)(c)). Alternatively, it will “place itself at the disposal of the parties concerned with a view to reaching a friendly settlement of the matter on the basis of respect for the human rights recognized in this Convention” (art. 48(1)(f)). If a settlement is not reached, the Commission will “draw up a report setting forth the facts and stating its conclusions”, a report that will be submitted to the States parties, “which shall not be at liberty to publish it” (art. 50(1) and (2)). If, after a prescribed period, the matter has not been settled or submitted to the Court, the Commission may “set forth its opinion and conclusions concerning the question submitted for its consideration” and may in cases where the State 88 Human Rights in the Administration of Justice: A Manual on Human Rights for Judges, Prosecutors and Lawyers