commitment to follow-up on the proposal. 58 77. On April 11, 2007, the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions communicated to the State its Opinion No. 20/2007 on the situation of the victims. In its Opinion, the Working Group concluded that the deprivation of liberty of Jorge Marcial Tzompaxtle Tecpile, Gerardo Tzompaxtle Tecpile and Gustavo Robles López was arbitrary and contravened Articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The Working Group requested that the State adopt the necessary measures to remedy the situation, in accordance with the norms and principles of the Covenant. 59 E. On threats against the lawyer of the victims and the death of Gustavo Robles López 78. On January 12, 2007, Ms. E.L.H., a member of the Solidarity Network for the Decade against Impunity and a lawyer of the victims indicated that she had received threats by telephone. She added that these threats were denounced in a timely fashion to the authorities, who had obligated Ms. López Hernández to distance herself from the case and to temporarily change her domicile. 60 79. It is an undisputed fact that Gustavo Robles López died on November 26, 2015 and that his death was not connected to the facts of the present case. VIII. MERITS 80. The Court will now analyze the scope of the State’s international responsibility for allegedly violating diverse conventional rights involving the detention, the application of arraigo and pre-trial detention and the criminal proceedings against Jorge Marcial and Gerardo Tzompaxtle Tecpile and Gustavo Robles López. The Court will analyze the arguments on the merits in the following order: a) the rights to personal liberty and to the presumption of innocence in relation to the obligation to adopt provisions of domestic law and b) the rights to personal integrity and to privacy in relation to the obligation to respect the rights. As was indicated (supra paras. 14 to 17), the State acknowledged its international responsibility for infringing the rights to personal liberty, to a fair trial, to privacy and to judicial protection (Arts. 7, 8, 11 and 25 of the Convention), read in conjunction with Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Jorge Marcial Tzompaxtle Tecpile, Gerardo Tzompaxtle Tecpile and Gustavo Robles López. The State acknowledged that the above violations were the result of “the detention, the vehicle search, the lack of information on the grounds of the detention, the failure to present the accused promptly before a judge, the lack of prior and detailed notice of the charges, the lack of a legal defense during the first days following detention, which led to the wrongful application of arraigo and of pre-trial detention sua sponte, following the procedures that were appropriate when the events occurred according to their nature at the time of the events.” (supra para. 14). Cf. National Human Rights Commission, Mexico. Note 002997, case: 2006/44/1/Q, January 31, 2007 (evidence file, f. 391 et seq.). 58 Cf. UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detentions. Opinion A/HRC/10/21/Add.1, pertinent parts (evidence file, f. 6036 et seq.). 59 No. 20/2007 (Mexico), November 22, 2007, 60 Cf. Urgent actions of Amnesty International and of the World Organization against Torture for the threats received by Elena López Hernández, March 19, 2007 (evidence file, f. 6030 et seq.). 21