27 El Frontón and were in the official penitentiary list, and that after the riots their relatives were not aware of their whereabouts, and State authorities refused to render information thereof, as well as to establish the identity of the missing persons, despite they were under their custody. 78. The Court stated, as has already done in another case, that if someone could understand that when human life is deprived, it also damages humane treatment, this is not the sense [of Article 5] used by the Convention, in essence, nobody should be exposed to torture, suffering, or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment, and every person deprived from liberty should be treated with due respect regarding the inherent dignity of mankind. 40 79. In this case it is not proven that Nolberto Durand Ugarte and Gabriel Pablo Ugarte Rivera were exposed to mistreatment or that their dignity was hurt by Peruvian authorities while they were detained at El Frontón penitentiary. The Court reached an identical conclusion regarding Neira Alegría Case, where same arguments like those in this application were stated. It is evident that there was excessive use of force to subdue the riot, and this constitutes vulnerability of the principle on proportion that should exist between the situation to be solved and the means employed to this end (supra paras. 67, 68, and 70). Based on this disproportion, there is no reason to suppose torture or cruel, inhumane, or degrading treatment, notions with their own juridical content that are not inferred by a necessary and automatic arbitrary way of deprivation of life, even in aggravating circumstances such as the current situations. 80. As a result, this Court considers that it has not been proven yet that The State violated Article 5(2) of the Inter-American Convention to the detriment of Nolberto Durand Ugarte and Gabriel Pablo Ugarte Rivera. XII VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 7(1) AND 7(5) RIGHT TO PERSONAL FREEDOM 81. Regarding the violation of Articles 7(1) and 7(5) of the Convention, the Commission stated that on February 14 and 15, 1986, Nolberto Durand Ugarte and Gabriel Pablo Ugarte Rivera, respectively, were detained by some members of the Directorship against Terrorism, without a warrant or having found them guilty of a flagrant felony, under suspicion of having participated in terrorists acts. 82. On the other hand, the State stated that related subversion issue investigation involved a task of intelligentsia including a follow-up to find out about other terrorists and to identify higher-ranking persons within the corresponding organizations. Thus, it considered as arbitrary that the Commission demanded mediation by a warrant at such level implies the exhaustion of previous stages of investigation at intelligentsia, police and Attorney General levels in which statement of alleged author must be disregarded. To this end the complaint shall become formal without the inclusion of this important element of investigation and instruction to be later opened with the detention order to present the judicial order, just after the possibility of interceding the one involved [...] 40 Neira Alegría et al Case, supra note 12, para. 86.