Martínez Meléndez; (iii) the violation of the right to presumption of innocence established in Article 8(2) of the Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) thereof, to the detriment of Jorge Martínez Meléndez; and (iv) the violation of the right of defense established in Article 8(2)(f) of the Convention to the detriment of Jorge Martínez Meléndez, Luis Archbold Jay and Enrique Archbold Jay. VIII.IV RIGHT TO PERSONAL INTEGRITY (ARTICLE 5 OF THE CONVENTION) A. Arguments of the Commission and the parties 457. The Commission noted that Mr. Damas Vega Atencio alleged that he was subjected to acts of torture or cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment; however, it pointed out that it did not have the basic elements of proof required to make a factual determination on these circumstances. 458. The SIPDH representatives alleged that on July 24, 2006, Damas Vega and other detainees filed a complaint with the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Comptroller of Services alleging that on July 20, 2006, a search was conducted during which they were subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as to acts of sexual violence. According to this complaint, 21 inmates housed in Cellblock D2, Dormitory No. 3, were subjected to abuse by officers of the Security Area, especially by Officer Reyes, who, with his fingers, touched the private parts of the inmates who were being searched. In addition to a body search of the anus, testicles and penis, they alleged that the modus operandi of the search also represented a risk for the inmates, since they were taken out of their dormitory, which could result in the “planting” of illicit objects inside the dormitory by the security guards. B. Considerations of the Court 459. In the instant case, Mr. Damas Vega filed a complaint with the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Comptroller of Services alleging that on July 20, 2006, a search was conducted at the CAI La Reforma during which he was subjected to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, as well as acts of sexual violence by prison guards. On September 24, 2006, he filed a criminal complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office of Alajuela alleging sexual abuse and abuse of authority by a prison officer during the events denounced on July 20, 2006. In addition, on October 2, 2006, Mr. Vega requested that the Court of Alajuela extend the criminal case to a supervisor and an inspector, superiors of the officer, considering them as the intellectual authors of the crime. On November 25, 2006, Mr. Vega filed a complaint with the Sentence Execution Court of Alajuela, against the Security Area B of the CAI La Reforma. He alleged that the practices of the prison officers during searches were abusive, and included sexual touching (supra paras. 233 to 237). 460. With regard to the manner in which searches should be conducted within a prison, the Mandela Rules 50, 51 and 52 ensure that searches of inmates shall be conducted in a manner that respects the inherent dignity of the human being and the privacy of the individual. In addition, the prison administration shall keep records of any searches that are carried out, in particular strip searches, body cavity searches and cell searches, as well as the reasons for such searches. Furthermore, invasive searches shall only be carried out when absolutely necessary, by qualified physicians or staff members who have been adequately trained. In addition, Principle XXI of the Principles and Best Practices on the Protection of Persons 139