20 69. The Court has observed that preventive detention “is the most severe measure that can be applied to a person charged with an offense; hence, its use should be exceptional, limited by the principle of lawfulness, the presumption of innocence, and the need and proportionality, in keeping with what is strictly necessary in a democratic society,”55 because “it is a precautionary rather than a punitive measure.”56 70. Article 7(5) of the American Convention guarantees the right of any person detained in pre-trial detention to be tried within a reasonable time or released, without detriment to the continuation of the proceedings. This right imposes temporal limits on the duration of pre-trial detention and, consequently, on the State’s power to protect the purpose of the proceedings by using this type of precautionary measure. When the duration of pre-trial detention exceeds a reasonable time, the State can restrict the liberty of the accused by other measures that are less harmful than deprivation of liberty by imprisonment and that ensure his presence at the trial. This right also imposes the judicial obligation to process criminal proceedings in which the accused is deprived of his liberty with greater diligence and promptness. The Court must examine whether the preventive detention to which Juan Carlos Bayarri was subjected exceeded a reasonable time. 71. In the instant case, the judicial authorities imposed on Mr. Bayarri a precautionary measure of preventive detention, ordered in a decision of December 20, 1991,57 and confirmed, following appeal, on February 20, 1992.58 This measures was prolonged until June 1, 2004, when his liberty was ordered “absolving [him] of guilt and the charges.”59 Mr. Bayarri spent a total of approximately 13 years in preventive detention.60 72. The alleged victim requested his release on three occasions,61 based on Law No. 24,390, which defines itself as the law regulating Article 7(5) of the American Convention. Article 1 of this law established that preventive detention could not exceed two years, as follows:62 55 Acosta Calderón v. Ecuador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 24, 2005. Series C No. 129, para. 74; Servellón García et al. v. Honduras. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 21, 2006. Series C No. 152, para. 88; and case of Yvon Neptune, supra note 14, para. 107. 56 Suárez Rosero v. Ecuador. Merits. Judgment of November 12, 1997. Series C No. 35, para. 77; case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Íñiguez, supra note 9, para. 145; and case of Yvon Neptune, supra note 14, para. 107. 57 Decision handed down by National Judge of First Instance No. 25 on December 20, 1991, in which he decided “TO CONVERT INTO PREVENTIVE DETENTION the current detention of JUAN CARLOS BAYARRI, whose other personal information is included in the official record, in relation to the offense of UNLAWFUL ASSOCIATION IN CONJUNCTION WITH REITERATED KIDNAPPING FOR RANSOM” (helpful evidence submitted by the State, exp7176 cuerpo7_92 pages 127 to 170). This decision was appealed on December 23, 1991, by the alleged victim’s legal representative (helpful evidence submitted by the State, exp7176cuerpo7_92.pdf, pages 178 to 175). In a court decision of December 30, 1991, the appeal was granted (helpful evidence submitted by the State, exp7176cuerpo7_92.pdf, page 207). 58 Decision of Chamber III of the Criminal and Correctional Chamber of February 20, 1992, deciding the appeal that had been filed, and confirming the preventive detention (helpful evidence submitted by the State, exp7176cuerpo10_92.pdf, pages 93 to 100). 59 Judgment of Chamber I of the National Federal Criminal and Correctional Appeals Chamber of June 1, 2004 (file of attachments to the application, attachment 1.7, folios 27 to 54). 60 United Nations, Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, supra note 47, principles 38 and 39. 61 Cf. requests for release filed by Juan Carlos Bayarri and the different judicial decision rejecting them (file of attachments to the application, appendix 3, tome VI, folios 2513 to 2608). 62 Cf. Law No. 24,390, published in the official gazette of November 22, 1994, see: www1.hcdn.gov.ar. This norm was subsequently amended by Law No. 25,430 of May 9, 2001, article 1 of which establishes that it amends article 1 of Law No. 24,390, as follows: “Preventive detention may not exceed two years, without a judgment