24 is the Supreme Law to which all other lesser laws and provisions are subordinated. 95. The aforementioned Article 114 bis provides that [p]ersons who, having been kept in detention for a time equal to or greater than one-third of the period established in the Criminal Code as the maximum sentence for the offense with which they are charged, have neither had their case discontinued nor been committed to trial, shall be immediately released by the judge hearing the case. Likewise, persons, who have been kept in detention without sentence for a time equal to or greater than half the period established by the Criminal Code as the maximum sentence for the offense with which they are charged, shall be released by the criminal court hearing the case. These provisions do not include persons charged with offenses punished under the Law on Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances. 96. Article 2 of the Convention establishes that [w]here the exercise of any of the rights or freedoms referred to in Article 1 is not already ensured by legislative or other provisions, the States Parties undertake to adopt, in accordance with their constitutional processes and the provisions of this Convention, such legislative or other measures as may be necessary to give effect to those rights and freedoms. 97. As the Court has maintained, the States Parties to the Convention may not order measures that violate the rights and freedoms recognized therein (International Responsibility for the Promulgation and Enforcement of Laws in Violation of the Convention (Arts. 1 and 2 American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-14/94 of December 9, 1994. Series A No. 14, para. 36). Whereas the first two provisions of Article 114 bis of the Ecuadorian Criminal Code accord detained persons the right to be released when the conditions indicated exist, the last paragraph of the same article contains an exception to that law. 98. The Court considers that this exception deprives a part of the prison population of a fundamental right, on the basis of the crime of which it is accused and, hence, intrinsically injures everyone in that category. This rule has been applied in the specific case of Mr. Suárez-Rosero and has caused him undue harm. The Court further observes that, in its opinion, this law violates per se Article 2 of the American Convention, whether or not it was enforced in the instant case. 99. In conclusion, the Court points out that the exception contained in the aforementioned Article 114 bis violates Article 2 of the Convention in that Ecuador has not taken adequate measures under its domestic law to give effect to the right enshrined in Article 7(5) of the Convention. XV On Articles 11 and 17 100. The Commission contended that Mr. Suárez-Rosero's 36-day incommunicado detention constituted an unwarranted restriction of his family's right to be informed of his situation, thus impairing the rights established in Articles 11 and 17 of the American Convention. 101. The State did not contest this argument in its answer to the application.