32 considered to be in keeping with the right to humane treatment embodied in Article 5 of the Convention; and (e) By sentencing Mr. Raxcacó Reyes to the mandatory death penalty without considering his individual circumstances, the State has violated his rights to physical, mental and moral integrity in violation of Article 5(1) of the Convention, and has subjected him to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment in violation of Article 5(2) thereof. The essential respect for the dignity of the individual, which underlies Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the Convention cannot be conciliated with a system that deprives the individual of his most fundamental rights, such as the right to life, without considering whether this exceptional form of punishment is adapted to the circumstances of the case. The determination of the mandatory death penalty which entails the arbitrary deprivation of life reinforces its characterization as cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment. Arguments of the representatives 92. In relation to Article 5 of the American Convention, the representatives indicated that the State is violating the right of Mr. Raxcacó Reyes to personal integrity in three ways: by imposing a mandatory death penalty; by the death row phenomenon, and by the prison conditions that he endures currently. Arguments of the State 93. In relation to Article 5 of the American Convention, the State indicated that Mr. Raxcacó Reyes was interviewed in order to verify his current prison conditions. According to the State, Mr. Raxcacó Reyes considered that his alimentation, medical, physical, visiting regime, hygiene and access to training and work conditions were good and his only request was for an effective remedy to decide his juridical situation as regards commutation of sentence. Findings of the Court 94. Article 5 of the American Convention establishes that: 1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 2. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with regard for the inherent dignity of the human person. […] 95. The Court has stated that any person deprived of his freedom has the right to live in prison conditions that are compatible with his personal dignity,58 and that the State must ensure the right to life and to personal integrity of all prisoners.59 Since 58 Cf. Case of Fermín Ramírez, supra note 1, para. 118; Case of Caesar, supra note 55, para. 96; Case of Lori Berenson Mejía, supra note 56, para. 102, and Case of Tibi. Judgment of September 7, 2004. Series C No. 114, para. 150. 59 Cf. Case of Bulacio. Judgment of September 18, 2003. Series C No. 100, para. 126; Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al., supra note 39, para. 65; Case of Cantoral Benavides, supra note 57, para. 87, and Case of Durand and Ugarte, supra note 39, para. 78.