45 4. Accused persons shall, save in exceptional circumstances, be segregated from convicted persons, and shall be subject to separate treatment appropriate to their status as unconvicted persons. […] 104. This Tribunal has established that a “person who is unlawfully detained is in an exacerbated situation of vulnerability creating a real risk that his other rights, such as the right to humane treatment and to be treated with dignity, will be violated.”91 Also, the Court has indicated that the restriction of the rights of the detainee, as a consequence of the deprivation of liberty or a collateral effect of it, must be rigorously limited; the restriction of a human right is only justified when it is absolutely necessary within the context of a democratic society.92 105. The international organizations for the protection of human rights have established that detainees have the right to live in conditions of imprisonment compatible with their personal dignity and that the State must guarantee them the right to personal integrity.93 106. The State is the guarantor of the rights of the detainees, and it must offer them life conditions compatible with their dignity.94 The European Court of Human Rights has indicated that according to [Article 3 of the Convention], the State must ensure that a person is detained in conditions compatible with the respect to his human dignity, that the manner and methods used to exercise the measure does not submit them to anguish or difficulty that exceed the inevitable level of suffering intrinsic to the detention, and that, given the practical demands of the imprisonment, his health and well-being are adequately insured, offering him, among other things, the medical assistance required.95 a) Arrest and custody in the Office of Criminal Investigation 107. This Tribunal considers that the acts committed by the State agents against Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez in virtue of his arrest and custody referred to in the section of facts proven of the present Judgment (supra paras. 54(12) and 54(14)) did not adjust to the stipulations included in Articles 5(1) and 5(2) of the Convention. b) Conditions of the detention 108. It has been proven that during the detention of Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez in the criminal centers of Tela and of Támara there was prison overpopulation; the alleged 91 Case of Tibi, supra note 80, para. 147; Case of the Gómez-Paquiyauri Brothers. Judgment of July 8, 2004. Series C No. 110, para. 108, and Case of Maritza Urrutia. Judgment of November 27, 2003. Series C No. 103, para. 87. 92 Cf. Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”. Judgment of September 2, 2004. Series C No. 112, para. 154, and Case of the “Five Pensioners”. Judgment of February 28, 2003. Series C No. 98, para. 116. 93 Cf. Case of García-Asto and Ramírez-Rojas, supra note 7, para. 221; Case of Raxcacó-Reyes. Judgment of September 15, 2005. Series C No. 133, para. 95, and Case of Fermín Ramírez. Judgment of June 20, 2005. Series C No. 126, para. 118. In that same sense: United Nations, Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted and proclaimed by the General Assembly in its Resolution 45/111, of December 14, 1990, Principle 1. 94 Cf. Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute”, supra note 92, para. 159. 95 Eur. Court H.R. Kudla v. Poland, judgment of 26 October 2000, No. 30210/96, para. 94.