37 127. When it comes to weighing the State’s obligations in this area, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners are a recognized instrument for interpreting the content of the right of persons deprived of their liberty to be treated humanely and with dignity.316 With regard to medical services, the Rules provide, inter alia, that “[t]he medical officer shall see and examine every prisoner as soon as possible after his admission and thereafter as necessary, with a view particularly to the discovery of physical or mental illness and the taking of all necessary measures.” 317 Furthermore, Principle 24 of the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment provides, “A proper medical examination shall be offered to a detained or imprisoned person as promptly as possible after his admission to the place of detention or imprisonment, and thereafter medical care and treatment shall be provided whenever necessary. This care and treatment shall be provided free of charge.318 128. For its part, Principle X of the Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas provides, “Persons deprived of liberty shall have the right to health, understood to mean the enjoyment of the highest possible level of physical, mental, and social well-being.” As to the quality of medical services, that provision establishes, “Treatment shall be based on scientific principles and apply the best practices.” For his part, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on question of torture noted that “States are under the obligation to respect the right to health by, inter alia, refraining from denying or limiting equal access for all persons, including persons deprived of their liberty, to preventive, curative and palliative health services.”319 129. A lack of appropriate medical care “does not satisfy the minimum material requirements of humane treatment due because of a person’s nature as a human being pursuant to Article 5 of the American Convention”320 and the lack of appropriate medical care to a person deprived of liberty and under State custody could be considered a violation of that right, depending on the particular circumstances of the individual, such as their state of health or the type of ailment, the time elapsed without treatment, its cumulative physical and mental effects, 321 and in some cases, the sex and age of the victim, among other factors.322 316 I/A Court H.R., César Mendoza et al. Argentina. Preliminary Objections, Merits and Reparations. Judgment of May 14, 2013. Series C, No. 260, par. 189. 317 Cfr. Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held at Geneva in 1955, and approved by the Economic and Social Council by its resolutions 663C (XXIV) of 31 July 1957 and 2076 (LXII) of 13 May 1977, para. 24. See, also, United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, Nos. 49 and 50. Adopted by General Assembly resolution 45/113, 14 December 1990. 318 Cfr. Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under any Form of Detention or Imprisonment. Adopted by General Assembly resolution 43/173, 9 December 1988, Principle 24. See, also Rule 24 of the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners. Adopted by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, held at Geneva in 1995, and approved by Economic and Social Council resolutions 663C (XXIV) of 31 July 1957 and 2076 (LXII) of 13 May 1977. 319 United Nations, report of the special rapporteur, Theo van Boven, Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Annual Report to the Commission on Human Rights (today Council), E/CN.4/2004/56, adopted on 29 December 1998, para. 56. 320 I/A Court H.R., Case of Vera Vera et al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 19, 2011. Series C No. 226, par. 44. I/A Court H.R., Case of De la Cruz Flores v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 18, 2004. Series C No. 115, par. 131; Case of García Asto and Ramírez Rojas v. Peru. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2005. Series C No. 137, par. 226. 321 I/A Court H.R., Case of Montero Aranguren et al. (Detention Center of Catia) v. Venezuela, Judgment of July 5, 2006. Series C No. 150, par. 103. 322 I/A Court H.R., Case of Vera Vera et al. v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 19, 2011. Series C No. 226, par. 44; The “Street Children” Case (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala, Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par. 74; Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs.