38 proportion.82 Besides, the arrest may become arbitrary if in its course facts attributable to the State, considered incompatible with the respect to the detained person’s human rights, occur. 67. The preventive detention is limited by the principles of legality, the presumption of innocence, need, and proportionality, all of which are strictly necessary in a democratic society.83 It is the most severe measure that can be applied to the person accused of a crime, reason for which its application must have an exceptional nature.84 The rule must be the defendant’s liberty while a decision is made regarding his criminal responsibility. 68. The legitimacy of the preventive detention does not arise only from the fact that the law allows its application under certain general hypotheses. The adoption of this precautionary measure requires a judgment of proportionality between said measure, the evidence to issue it, and the facts under investigation. If the proportionality does not exist, the measure will be arbitrary. 69. The State’s obligation to not restrict the detainee’s liberty beyond the limits strictly necessary to ensure that he will not impede the efficient development of the investigations and that he will not evade justice is inferred from Article 7(3) of the Convention.85 The personal characteristics of the alleged author and the seriousness of the crime that he is charged with are not, in themselves, sufficient justification for the preventive detention. The preventive detention is a precautionary measure, not a punitive one.86 The Convention is violated when a person whose criminal responsibility has not been established is kept detained for an excessively prolonged, and therefore disproportionate, period of time. This would be tantamount to anticipating a sentence.87 70. Pursuant to Article 71 of the Constitution of Honduras, when an arrest is performed, the person can not remain detained or incommunicated for more than 24 hours without being brought before a competent authority, which must issue a legal commitment order to inquire, which may not exceed six days. In the present case, the Sectional Court of First Instance of Tela issued an order of preventive detention against Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez, on May 2, 1997, five days after the arrest. 71. Once the preventive detention was ordered, the substance seized was object of two analysis, according to the reports issued by the Office of the Public Prosecutor, one 82 Cf. Case of García-Asto and Ramírez-Rojas, supra note 7, para.. 105; Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 15, para. 215, and Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note18, para. 57. 83 Cf. Case of García-Asto and Ramírez-Rojas, supra note 7, para. 106; Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 15, para. 197, and Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 18, para. 74. 84 Cf. Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 15, para. 196; Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 18, para. 74, and Case of Tibi, supra note 80, para. 106. 85 Cf. Case of Palamara-Iribarne, supra note 15, para. 198; Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 18, para. 111, and Case of Tibi, supra note 80, para. 180. 86 Cf. Case of García-Asto and Ramírez-Rojas, supra note 7, para. 106; Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 18, para. 75, and Case of Tibi, supra note 80, para. 180. 87 Cf. Case of Acosta-Calderón, supra note 18, para. 111; Case of Tibi, supra note 80, para. 180, and Case of Suárez Rosero. Judgment of November 12, 1997. Series C No. 35, para. 77.