114. The State’s arguments regarding to its second preliminary objection were as follows:
a) based on the principle of equality of arms and the right of defense, and in keeping with the Court’s case law, the Court should allow the exception for failure to claim violation of Article 26 of the American Convention;
b) under Article 61 of the American Convention, only the Commission and the States parties determine the subject matter of the litigation; therefore, the representatives’ pleading that the Court consider the alleged violation of Article 26 of the Convention, in relation to Articles XI, XII, XIII and XV of the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man, should be declared inadmissible; and
c) the representatives’ claim regarding the State’s alleged violation of the rights upheld in Article 26 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles XI, XII and XV of the American Declaration, was never the subject of debate or discussion in the case before the Commission. Indeed, no reference is made to any such alleged violation in Report No. 126/01 on Admissibility and Merits.