98. Based on all the above, the Court considers that the State has violated Article 9 of the Convention, in relation to Article 2 of the same, for having maintained in force the part of Article 132 of the Criminal Code that refers to the dangerousness of the agent, once the Convention was ratified by Guatemala."76 64. With regard to the instant case, the Court notes that the use of the criterion of dangerousness of the agent, both in the classification of the facts of the offense and in the determination of the corresponding punishment, was incompatible with the freedom from ex post facto laws provided for in the American Convention. The examination of the dangerousness of the agent implied the evaluation by the judge of facts that had not occurred and, therefore, implied a punishment based on a judgement on the personality of the offender and not on the criminal acts charged in accordance with the applicable criminal definition.77 Consequently, this Court considers that the State is responsible for the violation of Articles 4(2) and 9 of the American Convention, in relation to Articles 1(1) and 2 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Mr. Archila Pérez. 65. Regarding the violation of Article 4(1) of the Convention, the Court notes that the death sentence was never carried out, since Mr. Archila Pérez died on July 16, 1999, as a result of diabetic catoacidosis78 (that is, an acute complication of diabetes). In view of the foregoing, the Court considers that the State has not violated the aforementioned Article 4(1) of the American Convention, in relation to the obligations established in Article 1(1) of the same instrument. VIII-2 RIGHT TO HUMANE TREATMENT79 66. In this chapter, the Court will examine the allegations relating to the prison conditions of Messrs. Rodríguez Revolorio, López Calo and Archila Pérez, all in alleged violation of Articles 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of said instrument and Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the ICPPT. A. Arguments of the parties and the Commission 67. The Commission maintained, first, that the alleged victims were detained in inadequate conditions, with an almost total absence of medical supplies, despite the fact that two of them suffered from diabetes (i.e., Mr. López Calo and Mr. Archila Pérez), one of them eventually dying of the disease. It further indicated that the alleged victims had limited access to visitors, physical contact, and water. 68. The Commission specified that Mr. Aníbal Archila died on July 16, 1999, of complications related to diabetes, and therefore remained on death row for more than three years, while Mr. Rodríguez Revolorio and Mr. López Calo remained on death row until August 23, 2011, when the Supreme Court commuted their sentences, which means that they remained on death row for more than 14 years. The Commission concluded that the time and circumstances in which they remained on death row after the imposition of the death penalty, with the prolonged expectation that the sentence could be carried out, is serious enough to be considered cruel, inhuman and degrading Cf. Case of Fermín Ramírez v. Guatemala, supra, paras. 94-98. Cf. Case of Fermín Ramírez v. Guatemala, supra, para. 70. 78 Death certificate of Aníbal Archila Pérez issued by the Civil Registry of the Municipality of Escuintla, death no. 6468 (evidence file, folio 1329). 79 Article 5 of the American Convention. 76 77 20