{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.032758620689655175, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01810344827586207, 'mean_word_length': 4.863636363636363, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Part II Means of Protection, Ch.VII Inter-American Commission on Human Rights, s.3 Competence, Article 47

This chapter examines Article 47 of the American Convention on Human Rights (ACHR). Article 47 of the ACHR determines additional conditions of admissibility of individual petitions lodged in accordance with Article 44 or inter-States communications under Article 45 of the ACHR. The provision contains four rules of a different nature. Article 47-a is not an additional condition of admissibility. Rather, it indicates the procedural consequence of the non-fulfillment of the Article 46 requirements, that is, the non-admissibility of the petition or communication. Article 47-b refers to the facts at the basis of the action. They must establish a prima facie violation of the ACHR. This condition is very close to “groundless” or “obviously out of order” condition laid down by Article 47-c. In practice, the Inter-American Commission does not distinguish rigorously the two requirements. Last, Article 47-d imposes to the petitioners to respect the res judicata, as named by the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights and the Inter-American Court.