385. It should also be emphasized that, owing to their status as Mapuche leaders, Messrs. Norín Catrimán and Pichún Paillalao (Lonkos), and Mr. Ancalaf Llaupe (Werken), the restriction of their political rights also affected their communities because, owing to the nature of their functions and their social position, not only their individual rights were affected, but also those of the members of the Mapuche indigenous people they represented. 386. Based on the above considerations, the Court concludes that the State violated the political rights protected by Article 23 of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument to the detriment of Segundo Aniceto Norín Catrimán, Pascual Huentequeo Pichún Paillalao, Florencio Jaime Marileo Saravia, José Benicio Huenchunao Mariñán, Juan Patricio Marileo Saravia, Juan Ciriaco Millacheo Licán and Víctor Manuel Ancalaf Llaupe and Patricia Roxana Troncoso Robles. 3. 387. Right to personal integrity Article 5(1) of the Convention establishes the following: Article 5 Right to Humane Treatment 1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 388. The Court has established that “the violation of the right to physical and mental integrity of the individual has different levels and encompasses torture and other types of abuse or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment, the physical and mental aftereffects of which vary in intensity according to endogenous and exogenous factors that must be demonstrated in each specific situation.”373 The former refer to the characteristics of the treatment, such as the duration, method used or the way in which the suffering was inflicted, as well as the physical and mental effects that these may cause. The latter refer to the conditions of the individual who endures this suffering, including age, sex, health, and any other personal situation.374 389. The Court has indicated in its case law that criminal sanctions are an expression of the punitive powers of the State and entail the impairment, deprivation or alteration of the rights of the individual as a result of a wrongful act.375 Accordingly, in a democratic system, great care must be taken to ensure that these measures are adopted with strict respect for the basic rights of the individual and include a careful verification of the effective existence of the wrongful act.376 This last point has already been considered in other chapters of this Judgment, in which it has been concluded that several rights have been violated. It must now be determined whether the treatment received by the presumed victims entailed a disregard of the “basic rights of the individual,” or whether it was the usual result of deprivation of liberty. 390. The Court has also determined in its case law that, often, an inescapable consequence of the deprivation of liberty are effects on the enjoyment of human rights, in addition to the right 372 Juan Pichún stated that when his father had served his term of imprisonment, he could not exercise “the citizen’s right to participate, [because] he was denied the right to vote, [and any] participation […] to be able to assume public office.” Cf. Statement made por Juan Pichún before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on May 29 and 30, 2013. 373 Cf. Case of Loayza Tamayo v. Peru. Merits, para. 57, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina, para. 201. 374 Cf. Case of the "Street Children" (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits, para. 74, and Case of Mendoza et al. v. Argentina, para. 190. 375 Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs, para. 106, and Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, para. 314. 376 278. Cf. Case of Baena Ricardo et al. v. Panama. Merits, reparations and costs, para. 106, and Case of J. v. Peru, para. 130