63 20). In its answer to the Inter-American Commission’s application (supra para. 28), the State asked that the information contained in its brief of July 22, 2002, should be considered “an integral part” of its answer. VIII ARTICLE 5 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 1(1) THEREOF (RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT) Arguments of the Commission 95. With regard to Article 5 of the Convention, the Commission argued that: a) The system of continuous solitary confinement, the visiting regime and the physical conditions of detention comprised a violation of Article 5 of the American Convention, because they constituted cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment which violated the right to humane treatment; b) The alleged victim served “2 years, 8 months and 20 days (from January 17, 1996, to October 7, 1998) of her sentence to life imprisonment in the Yanamayo [prison …], located at an altitude of around 4,000 meters above sea level, and characterized by an extremely cold climate[, where] her access to the open air was limited to half an hour a day during the first year and a half of her sentence, and then one hour a day, as of July 1997; and c) the alleged victim was “subjected to a regime of continuous solitary confinement for a year and a half, which was longer than the time required by Article 3 of Decree Law No. 25,744.” Arguments of the representatives of the alleged victim 96 In their final written arguments, the representatives stated that they endorsed the arguments submitted by the Commission in the application brief in relation to Article 5 of the Convention, and added that Mr. Fujimori “had already used Lori Berenson for political ends, for his personal benefit, in the scandalous electoral campaign of April and May, 2000.” The alleged victim “was a ‘symbol fabricated’ by Fujimori’s hard line stance on terrorism, in clear violation of her rights under [A]rticles 5(1), 5(2), 11(1), 11(2) and 11(3) of the American Convention”. Arguments of the State 97. Regarding Article 5 of the Convention, the State: a) Did not “dispute or contest the Commission’s considerations on the prison regime to which [the alleged victim] was subjected in the Yanamayo Prison.” This situation was resolved with her transfer, and the change in her prison regime after she left the Yanamayo Prison; b) It proceeded in accordance with the standards established in the Convention and in the Court’s case law when “on August 31, 2000, it modified Lori Berenson’s prison regime [...] transferring her from the Socabaya prison […] to the Chorrillos Women’s Prison” and when, “on December 21, 2001, it