was especially complex, such as to justify the length of time that the proceeding lasted. Moreover, the Ecuadorian State did not advance any specific arguments as to the complexity of the matter or how any such complexities related to the actual delays in the proceeding. 58. Regarding the conduct of the judicial authorities, the Commission finds that the progress of the proceeding was hampered by significant delays. For example, when February 23, 1995, by which time Mr. Carranza was already in custody, the judge ordered his transfer to present his testimony in response to questioning, which only occurred on August 25. In addition, for the space of one year from September 11, 1995, when Mr. Carranza presented a brief, to September 13, 1996, the preliminary proceeding was closed while the case was referred to the prosecutor for an opinion. The Commission also notes that an additional period of a year and nine months elapsed between the issuance of the opinion in March 1997 and the public hearing in December 1998. The State did not justify those delays. 59. Finally, concerning the activity of the person on trial, the Commission observes that while it is true that Mr. Carranza did not appear for trial during the first year of the proceeding, the delays mentioned in the preceding paragraph occurred when he was in custody. Therefore, his initial failure to appear has no bearing on those delays. In this case, the uncertainty of having a criminal trial pending against him aside, the delay had a decisive impact on his right to personal liberty. 60. Based on the foregoing, the Commission concludes that the Ecuadorian State violated the right of Ramón Rosendo Carranza Alarcón to a trial within a reasonable time recognized at Article 8(1) of the American Convention, taken in conjunction with Article 1(1) of the same instrument. VI. CONCLUSIONS 61. Based on the considerations of fact and law set out above, the Commission concludes that the State of Ecuador is responsible for violation of the rights to personal liberty, a fair trial, and judicial protection recognized in Articles 7(1), 7(3), 7(5), 8(1) and 8(2) of the American Convention, taken in conjunction with the obligations established in Articles 1(1) and 2 of that instrument, to the detriment of Ramón Rosendo Carranza Alarcón. VII. RECOMMENDATIONS 62. Based on the foregoing conclusions, THE INTER-AMERICAN COMMISSION ON HUMAN RIGHTS RECOMMENDS THAT THE STATE OF ECUADOR: 1. Make comprehensive reparation to Mr. Ramón Rosendo Carranza Alarcón through measures that include material and nonpecuniary damages to the victim for the injuries caused by the violations established in this report. 2. Adopt the necessary measures to ensure that both the applicable norms and the respective practices in relation to pretrial detention are compatible with the standards established in this report. Done and signed in Buenos Aires, Argentina, on the 23rd day of the month of May, 2017. (Signed): Francisco José Eguiguren, President; Margarette May Macaulay, First Vice-President; Esmeralda E. Arosemena Bernal de Troitiño, Second Vice-President; José de Jesus Orozco Henríquez, Paulo Vannuchi, James L. Cavallaro, and Luis Ernesto Vargas Silva, Commissioners. 11