63 The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition. a) Regarding the detention of Wilson García-Asto on June 30, 1995 104. The Court has pointed out that, according to Article 7(1) of the Convention, the protection of liberty safeguards “both the individuals’ physical liberty and their personal safety, in a context in which the lack of guarantees may result in the subversion of the rule of law and in the deprivation of the minimum forms of legal protection against detainees.”142 105. Regarding sub-paragraphs (2) and (3) of Article 7 of the Convention as to the prohibition against illegal or arbitrary detention or arrest, the Court has stated that: [a]ccording to the first of said provisions [Article 7(2) of the Convention] no one shall be deprived of his physical liberty except for the reasons and under the conditions established beforehand by the Constitution of the State Party concerned or by the law established pursuant thereto (material aspect), and with strict observance of the proceedings objectively defined therein (formal aspect). In the second case [Article 7(3) of the Convention], there is a condition according to which no one shall be arbitrarily arrested or imprisoned for reasons and methods which –though qualified as legal- may be deemed to be incompatible with the respect for fundamental rights of the individual, due, among other things, to their unreasonable, unforeseeable, or disproportionate nature.143 106. The Court understands that preventive detention is the most serious measure that can be applied to someone accused of a crime, wherefore its application must be exceptional, as it is limited by the principles of nullum crimen nulla poena sine lege praevia, presumption of innocence, need, and proportionality, which are essential in a democratic society.144 In this regard, the Court has stated that preventive detention is a precautionary measure, and not a punitive one.145 107. With respect to the illegal and arbitrary detention of Wilson García-Asto, in its answer to the application, the State pointed out that said detention was carried out according to the Peruvian Constitution of 1993, in force at the time of his detention, and which in Article 2, subparagraph (24)(f), regarding personal liberty and security, stated that: 142 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 56; Case of Tibi. Judgment of September 7, 2004. C Series No. 114, para. 97; and Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers. Judgment of July 8, 2004. C Series No. 110, para. 82. 143 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 57; Case of Tibi, supra note 142, para. 98; and Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers, supra note 142, para. 83. 144 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 74; Case of Tibi, supra note 142, para 106; and Case of the Juvenile Reeducation Institute. Judgment of September 2, 2004. C Series No. 112, para. 228. 145 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 75; Case of Tibi, supra note 142, para. 180; and Case of Suárez-Rosero. Judgment of November 12, 1997. C Series No. 35, para. 77.