52 Based on the acts of sexual violence that Ms. Espinoza allegedly suffered on the premises of the DIVISE and the DINCOTE, they also argued the violation of the right to privacy (honor and dignity). In addition, the representatives argued that Article 7 of the Convention of Belém do Pará had been violated to the detriment of Gladys Espinoza. The State, for its part, contested the facts relating to Ms. Espinoza’s detention and affirmed that all the facts mentioned were being investigated. 139. In order to analyze the factual and legal disputes described by the Commission and the parties, first, the Court will recall the general standards set out in its case law with regard to humane treatment and the prohibition of using torture against those who are in the State’s custody. Subsequently, the Court will refer to the arguments that have been submitted in the order indicated in the preceding paragraph, taking into account the context of gender-based violence and the torture of women who were being investigated for supposedly committing acts of terrorism, that has already been established (supra paras. 60 to 67). A) General standards relating to personal integrity and the torture of detainees 140. Article 5(1) of the Convention recognizes, in general terms, the right to personal integrity, of both a physical and mental, and also a moral nature. Meanwhile, Article 5(2) establishes, specifically, the absolute prohibition to subject someone to torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, as well as the right of all persons deprived of their liberty to be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. 220 The Court understands that any violation of Article 5(2) of the American Convention necessarily entails the violation of Article 5(1) thereof. 221 141. The Court has established that torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are strictly prohibited by international human rights law. 222 The prohibition of torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is absolute and nonderogable, even under the most difficult circumstances, such as war, threat of war, the fight against terrorism and any other crimes, states of emergency, or internal unrest or conflict, suspension of constitutional guarantees, internal political instability or other public emergencies or catastrophes. 223 Nowadays, this prohibition is part of international jus cogens. 224 Both universal 225 and regional treaties 226 establish this prohibition and the non-derogable right not to 220 Cf. Case of Yvon Neptune v. Haiti, supra, para. 129, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 303. The principles contained in Article 5(2) of the Convention are also included in Articles 7 and 10(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which establish, respectively, that “[n]o one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment,” and that “[a]ll persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with humanity and with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.” The first and sixth principles of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment establish the same, respectively. For its part, Article 3 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms establishes that: “[n]o one shall be subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.” Cf. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Articles 7 and 10(1); Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, principles 1 and 6, and European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, Article 3. 221 Cf. Case of Yvon Neptune v. Haiti, supra, para. 129, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 303. 222 Cf. Case of Cantoral Benavides v. Peru. Merits, supra, para. 95, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 304. 223 Cf. Case of Lori Berenson Mejía v. Peru, supra, para. 100, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 304. 224 Cf. Case of Caesar v. Trinidad and Tobago. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 11, 2005. Series C No. 123, para. 100, and Case of J. v. Peru, supra, para. 304. 225 Cf. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7; Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 2; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 37, and International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families, Article 10.