82. The IACHR has underscored that the American Convention prohibits torture or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment against anyone under any circumstances. The Commission has stated that "An essential aspect of the right to personal security is the absolute prohibition of torture, a peremptory norm of international law creating obligations erga omnes."82 For its part, the Court has repeatedly pointed out that "torture and cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment are strictly prohibited by International Human Rights Law. The absolute prohibition of torture, both physical and psychological, is currently part of the domain of the international jus cogens."83 83. According to the case law of the inter-American system for conduct to be characterized as torture the following three elements must be present: i) the act is intentional; ii) it causes intense physical or mental suffering; and iii) it is committed to achieve a specific goal or purpose.84 The Commission once again points out, with respect to allegations of torture, that in many cases, such as the present case, the person generally lacks the means to prove acts of violence against him or her. 85. 84. In the instant case, Mr. Cortez alleged impairment of his personal integrity in connection with his detentions. He pointed out in that regard that violent methods were used and that he had to spend the night in the cold in an office. He mentioned, second, that in July 1997, while being held incommunicado, he was deprived of sleep and that at time the food he was given had been spat on. The Commission already established the fact that he was held incommunicado for 19 days, in addition to which there are these allegations of mistreatment. Given the fact that he was incommunicado and the nature of the alleged mistreatment, obviously Mr. Cortez has no direct proof of what happened. The Ecuadorian State did not contest the reference to solitary confinement, which in itself is a violation of personal integrity and constitutes a threat of other human rights violations being committed in a situation of total defenselessness, such as those described by Mr. Cortez. 85. Thus, although it is not possible to establish in detail the mistreatment endured by the victim, the IACHR considers that the fact of being held incommunicado and the exposure to additional mistreatment without judicial supervision for a period as long as that described constituted impairment of personal integrity and a violation of Articles 5.1 and 5.2 of the American Convention in conjunction with Article 1.1 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Mr. Cortez. C. Right to judicial guarantees and judicial protection (Articles 8.1, 8.2, 8.2 b), c) and d)86 of the American Convention in conjunction with Article 1.1 thereof) 1. Regarding the right to a competent authority 86. Article 8.1 of the Convention upholds the right to a hearing by a "competent... tribunal previously established by law." Thus , persons "the right to be tried by ordinary courts of justice in accordance with legally established procedures." The State should not establish tribunals that do not apply duly established procedural IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights, OEA/SER.L/V/II.116, Doc. 5 rev. 1 corr.,October 22, 2002. Citing: IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights of Asylum Seekers within the Canadian Refugee Determination System. OEA/Ser.L/V/II.106, Doc. 40 rev., February 28, 2000, par. 118. 83 I/A Court HR. of Bueno-Alves v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 164, par. 76; I/A Court H.R. Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, par. 271; and I/A Court H.R., Case of Baldeón García v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of April 6 , 2006. Series C No. 147, par. 117. 84 IACHR, Report No. 5/96, Case 10.970, Merits, Raquel Martin Mejía, Peru, March 1, 1996, section 3, and I/A Court of H.R. Case of BuenoAlves v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C No. 164, par. 79. 85 IACHR Report No. 82/13, Case 12.679, Merits, José Agapito Ruano Torres and family, El Salvador, November 4, 2013, par. 162. I/A Court HR. Case of Cabrera García and Montiel Flores v. Mexico. Judgment of November 26, 2010. Series C No. 220, par. 128. 86 The pertinent portions of Article 8 of the American Convention provide: 1. Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 2. Every person accused of a criminal offense has the right to be presumed innocent so long as his guilt has not been proven according to law. During the proceedings, every person is entitled, with full equality, to the following minimum guarantees: (…)b) prior notification in detail to the accused of the charges against him; d) the right of the accused to defend hmself personally or to be assisted by legal counsel of his own choosing, and to communicate freely and privately with his counsel. 82 16