33 the State is responsible for detention centers, it must guarantee the existence of conditions that respect the prisoners’ rights.60 Keeping a person imprisoned in overcrowded conditions, without ventilation and natural light, without a bed to rest on or adequate conditions of hygiene, in isolation or incommunicado, or with undue restrictions in the visiting regime, is a violation of his personal integrity.61 96. The Human Rights Committee has stated that keeping a person confined in a small cell, twenty-three hours each day, isolated from other prisoners, in darkness, without anything to keep him occupied, and without being allowed to work or to undergo education, constitutes a violation of his right to be treated with humanity and with regard for the inherent dignity of the human person.62 In the Mukong case,63 the Committee insisted on the universality of the right to decent and humane treatment and rejected scarcity of resources as an excuse for the failure to respect this right. 97. In Soering v. United Kingdom, the European Court determined that the socalled “death row phenomenon,” consisting of a prolonged period of detention awaiting and prior to execution, during which the condemned man suffers mental anguish and is subject to extreme tension and psychological trauma as a result of the constant waiting for what will be the ritual of his own execution, involves cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.64 98. That same Court has established that, in all cases in which the death penalty is imposed, it is necessary to consider the personal circumstances of the condemned man, the conditions of his detention while he awaits execution and the duration of the detention prior to the execution in light of Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.65 99. Numerous decisions of international organizations invoke the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, in order to interpret the content of the right of prisoners to decent and humane treatment. These rules prescribe the basic rules for a prisoner’s accommodation, hygiene, medical care and exercise.66 60 Cf. Case of Lori Berenson Mejía, supra note 56, para. 102; Case of Tibi, supra note 59, para. 150, and Case of Bulacio, supra note 59, para. 126. 61 Cf. Case of Fermín Ramírez, supra note 1, para. 118; Case of Caesar, supra note 55, para. 96, and Case of Lori Berenson Mejía, supra note 56, para. 102. 62 Cf. UN, Human Rights Committee, Anthony McLeod v. Jamaica, Communication No. (CCPR/C/62/D/734/1997), para. 6(4). 734/1997 63 Cf. UN, Human Rights Committee, Mukong v. Cameroon, Communication No. 458/1991, (CCPR/C/51/D/458/1991), para. 9(3). 64 Cf. Soering v. United Kingdom. Judgment of July 7, 1989. Series A, Vol. 161. Likewise, Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., supra note 39, para. 167. 65 66 Cf. G.B. v. Bulgaria, No. 42346/98, § 73, ECHR March 11, 2004. Cf. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, held in Geneva in 1995, and adopted by the Economic and Social Council in its resolutions 663C (XXIV) of July 31, 1957, and 2076 (LXVII) of May 13, 1977, inter alia: