57 and duty to guarantee his personal integrity while detained. As a result, the State, being responsible for detention facilities, is the guarantor of the rights of detainees. 138 166) In addition, the United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated that the detention of a prisoner with other persons, in conditions that present a serious health danger, constitutes a violation of Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which stipulates that no one shall be subject to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. 139 167) Likewise, in Soering v. United Kingdom, the European Court found that the "death row phenomenon" is a cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and is characterized by a prolonged period of detention while awaiting execution, during which prisoners sentenced to death suffer severe mental anxiety in addition to other circumstances, including, among others: the way in which the sentence was imposed; lack of consideration of the personal characteristics of the accused; the disproportionality between the punishment and the crime committed; the detention conditions while awaiting execution; delays in the appeal process or in reviewing the death sentence during which time the individual experiences extreme psychological tension and trauma; the fact that the judge does not take into consideration the age or mental state of the condemned person; as well as continuous anticipation about what practices their execution may entail. 140 168) In the present Case, as a result of legislation and judicial procedures that are contrary to the American Convention, all of the victims in the present Case live under the constant threat that they may be taken to be hanged at any moment. According to the report submitted by the expert Gaietry Pargass, the procedures leading up to the death by hanging of those convicted of murder terrorize and depress the prisoners; others cannot sleep due to nightmares, much less eat (supra para. 77(c)). 169) After considering the expert testimony offered on the subject, 141 the Court finds that the detention conditions that all the victims in this case (supra para. 2) have experienced and continue to endure compel the victims to live under circumstances that impinge on their physical and psychological integrity and therefore constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. 170) The Court holds that despite the fact that a violation of Article 5 of the Convention was alleged by the Commission for only twenty-one of the victims in the present Case, this does not preclude the ability this Tribunal, pursuant to the general 138 Cf. I/A Court H.R., Neira Alegría et al. Case. Judgment of January 19, 1995. Series C No. 20, para. 60; and I/A Court H.R., Cantoral Benavides Case, supra note 134, para. 87. 139 I/A Court H.R., Cantoral Benavides Case, supra note 134, para. 86, citing: United Nations Human Rights Committee, Moriana Hernández Valentini de Bazzano v. Uruguay, No. 5/1977 of 15 August 1979, paras. 9-10. 140 Cf. European Court of Human Rights, Soering v. United Kingdom. Judgment of July 7, 1989. Series A, Vol. 161. Likewise, the Supreme Court of the United States of America recognised in Furman v. Georgia that the time spent awaiting the execution of a death sentence destroys the human spirit and constitutes psychological torture that often leads to insanity. Cf. Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238, 287288 (1972). 141 77(c). Cf. Expert reports of Gaietry Pargass, and Vivien Stern and Andrew Coyle, supra paras. 76(b) and