39 69. Pursuant to the Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials,130 firearms shall only be used under extraordinary circumstances such as “self-defence or defence of others, against the imminent threat of death or serious injury, to prevent the perpetration of a particularly serious crime involving a serious threat to life, to arrest a person presenting such a danger and resisting their authority, or to prevent his or her escape, and only when less extreme means are insufficient to achieve these objectives. In any event, intentional lethal use of firearms may only be made when strictly unavoidable in order to protect life.” 70. As stated in prior cases, the Court acknowledges the power, and even the duty of the State, to guarantee safety and public order, especially within prisons.131 Detention centers as Catia prison, where arms and drug trafficking, the creation of gangs and violence subculture increase under the passive conduct of the State, require the permanent protection and safeguard of the safety and life of detainees and officers that work in such centers. However, the State cannot make use of force with lethal consequences for inmates only grounded on the existence of the abovementioned situation. Otherwise, it would imply to release the State from its duty to take preventive measures and also from its responsibility for the creation of such conditions. 71. It is clear that the measures to be adopted by the State must prioritize a system of preventive measures intended, inter alia, to prevent arms trafficking and the increase of violence, over a repressive system. 72. In the instant case, according to the sayings of some former detainees, in the early morning of November 27, 1992, “the guards [...] opened the cell doors telling the detainees that they were released, and waited for them to go out in order to shoot them.” Pursuant to other versions of the facts, a massive breakout attempt occurred but it failed due to the action of prison authorities that used excessive force to control the situation. The Prison Guards, the Metropolitan Police and, afterwards, the National Guards had all of them participated to suppress the breakout attempt. Despite the different versions about the facts, it is clearly shown by the autopsy reports submitted to the Court and by the acknowledgment of the State, that the victims died due to firearm injuries, and in many cases, the bullet trajectory show that shots were illegally made. 73. Whether the events that took place on November 27 and 28, 1992 in the Detention Center of Catia involve an action devised and planned by the government authorities to arbitrarily kill tens of inmates, or whether they are the result of a disproportionate reaction from the State to the massive breakout attempt and the No. 38595/97, para. 107-108; ECHR, Case of McCann and Others v. the United Kingdom. Judgment of September 27, 1995. Series A No. 324, paras. 148-150 and 194; Código de Conducta para Oficiales de Seguridad Pública adopted by the General Assembly of the United Nations, Resolution 34/169, dated December 17, 1979, Article 3. 130 Cf. Principios Básicos sobre el Empleo de la Fuerza y de Armas de Fuego por parte de Oficiales Encargados de Hacer Cumplir la Ley (Basic Principles on the Use of Force and Firearms by Law Enforcement Officials. Adopted by the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and Treatment of Offenders, La Habana, Cuba, August 27 to September 7,,1990, Principle 9. 131 Cf. Matter of Yare I and Yare II Capital Region Penitenciary Center, supra note 128, fifteenth whereas clause; Matter of Monagas Judicial Confinement Center (“La Pica”), supra note 128, seventeenth whereas clause, and Case of Neira Alegría et al. Judgment of January 19, 1995. Series C No. 20, para. 75.