22 and psychological trauma caused by the circumstances to which prisoners are exposed, which include the way in which the sentence was imposed, the disproportion between the crime committed and the punishment, and the failure to consider the personal characteristics of the accused, which, in sum, constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment.80 85. The Court notes that, for two years and 11 months, Messrs. Girón and Castillo remained under the constant threat that they could be executed at any time. As a result of the sentence they received, Messrs. Girón and Castillo had to contemplate the perspective of the extinction of their lives during this time. The Court also underlines that the way in which a death sentence is imposed may constitute a factor that determines its incompatibility with the provisions of Article 5 of the American Convention.81 The Court notes that Messrs. Girón and Castillo were sentenced to death as a result of criminal proceedings in which Article 4(1) and 4(2) of the Convention were violated, in addition to several principles relating to due process (infra para. 123). 86. The Court also notes that Decree No. 234 established the “firing squad” as a method of executing the death penalty and that this was subsequently substituted by “lethal injection” based on Decree No. 100-1996 of November 1996. The third considering paragraph of that decree reveals that the State recognized that, with the lethal injection procedure, there is a guarantee that it is effective within a very short time and involves minimum suffering for the persons concerned;82 therefore, it substituted the firing squad as the method of executing capital punishment. In this regard, the Court understands that the State changed the method of execution because it considered that the new method caused less suffering. However, it made this change after the execution of the alleged victims who were shot. 87. Furthermore, the Court notes that the television coverage of the execution of Messrs. Girón and Castillo was incompatible with human dignity. It constituted degrading treatment because the alleged victims in this case were treated as objects to illustrate that certain conducts were repudiated by society in Guatemala. 88. Consequently, the Court concludes that Messrs. Girón and Castillo endured severe mental suffering as a result of the anguish of knowing that they were on death row following proceedings that suffered from numerous flaws, as well as due to the coverage of the execution, which violated their right to physical, mental and moral integrity contained in Article 5(1) of the American Convention and constituted cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment contrary to Article 5(2) thereof, all in relation to Article 1(1) of this instrument. 89. Lastly, the Commission and the representatives argued that the method of executing the death penalty by firing squad constituted an act of torture. Based on the violations that the Court has already declared in this case, it considers that it is not necessary to rule in this regard. C. Conclusion Cf. Case of Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. v. Trinidad and Tobago, supra, para. 167. Cf. ECHR, Soering v. The United Kingdom, no. 14038/88, supra, para. 106, and Shamayev and Others v. Georgia and Russia, no. 36378/02, Judgment of April 12, 2005, para. 333. 82 The third considering paragraph of the law establishing the procedure for executing the death penalty, Decree No. 100-1996 of November 28, 1996, established that: […] Modern trends in forensic medicine recommend the use of the procedure of lethal injection for the execution of capital punishment; it combines the guarantee of its effectiveness in a very short time, with the minimum suffering for the person involved and, for this reason, it is desirable to adopt this method in the system for implementing Guatemalan criminal procedure and, therefore, the corresponding rules for its regulation must be issued. 80 81