103 k) the statute regulating the prison system has not been revised, despite the fact that the State acknowledges the need for its revision. Nor does Paraguay have a Law on Enforcement of Criminal Judgments. Pleadings of the State 199. In the case of Article 2 of the Convention, the State argued that prior to 1998 Paraguay did not have a criminal justice system that emphasized guarantees and that provided a special proceeding for juveniles; nor did its juvenile justice code conform to international standards governing this subject; however, its fulfillment of its obligation to adopt domestic measures was “beyond question,” given the new laws that began to be introduced with penal and judicial reform in Paraguay starting in 1997, one year after the present case was submitted to the Commission. 200. In the case of Article 8 of the Convention, the State reasoned that: a) in the petition of generic habeas corpus it filed, the Tekojojá Foundation, the original complainant, acknowledged that the minors were lawfully deprived of their liberty; b) it complied with its obligation under Article 8(2)(e) of the Convention, to provide legal counsel to the inmates at the Center. Most of the inmates at the Center turned to the Ministry of Public Defense to be assigned defenders, who provided legal assistance to ensure effective procedural guarantees and due process of law; and c) the Commission has utterly failed to demonstrate that the State violated Article 8(2)(c) of the Convention, a right that every accused person has to be provided with adequate time and means for the preparation of his defense. Considerations of the Court 201. Given the particulars of the instant case, the Court will analyze Articles 2 and 8(1) of the American Convention in combination and in relation to Articles 19 and 1(1) thereof. The Court will spell out the State’s obligations under Article 2 of the Convention and then analyze them in the context of the judicial guarantees that the Convention provides for children in conflict with the law. 202. First, this Court has already established that the alleged victims or their legal representatives can assert or invoke new rights in their brief of pleadings and motions (supra para. 125), which was done in the case of Article 2 of the American Convention. 203. Article 2 of the Convention provides that: Where 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 or freedoms. 204. Article 8(1) of the American Convention, for its part, provides that: