must verify whether the detention of Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci, Eduardo Matson Ospino, Orlando Quijano and José Vicente Rubiano Galvis was executed pursuant to the laws of Colombia. 401. As regard the arbitrariness referred to in Article 7(3) of the Convention, the Court has established that no one can be subjected to detention or imprisonment for reasons and by methods that – even though they are classified as lawful – may be considered incompatible with respect for the fundamental rights of the individual because, among other matters, they are unreasonable, unpredictable, or disproportionate. 605 Thus, the arbitrariness indicated in Article 7(3) of the Convention has its own legal content, which only requires analysis in the case of detentions that are considered lawful. 606 Nevertheless, domestic law, the applicable procedure, and the relevant express or tacit general principles must, in themselves, be compatible with the Convention. 607 Thus, the concept of “arbitrariness” should not be equated to “contrary to the law,” but should be interpreted more broadly in order to include elements of irregularity, injustice and unpredictability. 608 402. Furthermore, the Court emphasizes that the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty is a non-derogable right, which cannot be suspended and is applicable even in cases in which the detention is carried out to ensure public safety. 609 The International Committee of the Red Cross has established that the prohibition of arbitrary deprivation of liberty is a norm of customary international humanitarian law, applicable in both international and noninternational armed conflicts. 610 Consequently, pursuant to the “obligations under international law,” 611 the prohibition of arbitrary detention or imprisonment cannot be suspended during an internal armed conflict. 403. The Court also reiterates that the failure to record a detention may constitute a violation of Articles 7(1) and 7(2) of the Convention (supra para. 247). B.2.1) Deprivation of liberty of Yolanda Santodomingo Albericci, Eduardo Matson Ospino and Orlando Quijano Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 96, and Case of Torres Millacura et al. v. Argentina. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 26, 2011. Series C No. 229, para. 74. 605 Cf. Case of Gangaram Panday v. Suriname. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of January 21, 1994. Series C No. 16, para. 47, and Case of J. v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2013. Series C No. 275, para. 127. 606 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo ��ñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, paras. 93 and 96, and Case of J. v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2013. Series C No. 275, para. 127. 607 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 91, and Case of J. v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2013. Series C No. 275, para. 127. 608 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 92, and Case of J. v. Peru. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2013. Series C No. 275, para. 127. 609 Cf. Osorio Rivera and family members v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 26, 2013. Series C No. 274, para. 120, citing Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 29 States of Emergency, CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.11, 31 August 2001, paras. 11 and 16, and Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Report of the Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, A/HRC/22/44, 24 December 2012, paras. 42 to 51. Also, see, Human Rights Committee, General comment No. 8 of 1982, HRI/GEN/1/Rev.9 (Vol.I), para. 4. 610 Cf. ICRC, Customary International Humanitarian Law, Vol. I, rule 99, edited by Jean-Marie Henckaerts and Louise Doswald-Beck, 2007. 611 Article 27(1) of the American Convention on Human Rights. 139