65 admissible where based on the same facts or grounds, the subject matter of pending legal proceedings or proceedings which have already been adjudicated.” 112. The Court has considered that “writs of habeas corpus and amparo remedies (constitutional guarantees for the protection of civil rights) are essential judicial guarantees for the protection of certain rights which suspension is prohibited by Article 27(2) [of the Convention] and which, in addition, are useful to preserve lawfulness in a democratic society.”148 113. This Court has established that the protection of a person against the arbitrary exercise of public power is the main purpose of human rights international protection.149 In this regard, the lack of effective domestic remedies renders a person defenseless. Article 25(1) of the Convention sets forth, in broad terms, the obligation of the States to provide all individuals under their jurisdiction an effective legal remedy against acts which violate their fundamental rights.150 114. The effectiveness of Article 6 of Decree-Law No. 25.659 at the time when Wilson García-Asto was arrested, and during the processing of the first proceedings brought against him, legally prohibited the possibility of filing writs of habeas corpus. The Court understands that the amendment introduced by Decree-Law No. 26.248 did not benefit the alleged victim, as his case was the “matter of pending proceedings.” 115. By virtue of the foregoing, and considering the partial acknowledgement of the facts by the State, the fact that this was not a case of flagrante delicto, and the lack of a judicial arrest warrant against Wilson García-Asto, the fact that he was brought before the competent judicial authority only seventeen days after his arrest, and that he was deprived of the possibility to recourse to a competent judge or court so that the latter would decide without delay on the lawfulness of his arrest or detention, as well as the lack of legal protection, this Court declares that Peru has violated Articles 7(1), 7(2), 7(3), 7(5), 7(6), and 25 of the Convention to his detriment, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, at the time of his arrest and during the first judicial proceedings brought against him. 116. The above violations are prior to and independent of the fact that the Peruvian courts, by means of a judgment rendered on January 15, 2003 (supra para. 97(30)) regarding a writ of habeas corpus filed by Wilson García-Asto’s next of kin, annulled the judgment and the first proceeding against him. * 148 The Habeas Corpus Under Suspension of Guarantees (Articles 27(2), 25(1), and 7(6) of the American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of January 30, 1987. Series A No. 8, para. 42; and cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 90; Case of Tibi, supra note 142, para. 128; Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers, supra note 142, para. 97; and Judicial Guarantees in Emergency Situations (Articles 27(2), 25, and 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC9/87 of October 6, 1987. Series A, No. 9, para. 33. 149 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 92; Case of Tibi, supra note 142, para. 130; and Case of the Juvenile Reeducation Instititute, supra note 144, para. 239. 150 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 7, para. 92; Case of Tibi, supra note 142, para. 130; and Case of 19 Tradesmen. Judgment of July 5, 2004. Series C No. 109, para. 194.