1. Right to life and humane treatment (Article 4 and 574 of the American Convention) 98. The right to life, as established in Article 4.1 of the American Convention, provides that: 1. Every person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life. 99. Additionally, the right to humane treatment, included in Article 5.1 of the American Convention, establishes that: 1. Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. 100. Hereunder, the Commission will summarize some general considerations regarding the right to life and humane treatment in connection with the right to health, as well as relevant international standards on the subject of HIV/AIDS. Following the summary, the Commission will examine the specific case before it. 1.1 General considerations on the right to live and humane treatment in connection with the right to health 101. The Inter-American Commission and the Court have held that the right to life is fundamental inasmuch as it is essential for the exercise of all other human rights.75 Because of this nature, States have the obligation to ensure the creation of the conditions required for the full and free enjoyment thereof.76 Additionally, they have established that compliance with Article 4, in connection with Article 1.1 of the American Convention, not only presupposes that no one can be deprived arbitrarily of his or her life (negative obligation), but also requires that States take the appropriate measures to protect and preserve the right to life (positive obligation), as part of their duty to ensure full and free enjoyment of the rights of all persons under their jurisdiction.77 This specifically includes States’ duty to adopt the necessary measures to establish an adequate legal framework to deter any threat to the right to life.78 102. Furthermore, the Inter-American Court has addressed the concept of dignified life, among the obligations imposed under Article 4 of the American Convention. Thus, in the Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al) v. Guatemala, the Court established that “the fundamental right to life includes (…) also the right that he will not be prevented from having access to the conditions that guarantee a dignified existence.”79 This interpretation was revisited in three cases of indigenous communities against Paraguay, for On the basis of the principle iura novit curia, the Commission shall take into consideration the alleged violation of Article 5 of the American Convention. The Commission stresses that the facts supporting this position are an integral and inseparable part of the case and, in addition, emerge from the information and documents provided by the parties in the course of the proceedings of the present case. 74 75 IA Court of HR, Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par. 144; Case of Zambrano Vélez et al v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, par. 78. 76 IA Court of HR, Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par. 144. 77 IA Court of HR. Case of Kawas Fernández v. Honduras. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 4, 2012. Series C No. 196, par. 74. 78 IA Court of HR. Case of Gonzales Lluy et al v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 01, 2015. Series C No. 298. Par. 169. 79 IA Court of HR, Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, par. 144 and 191. 25