195. There is no information available to the Commission as to whether from August 17, 1994 to June 14, 1996, Mr. Eusebio Domingo Revelles had a defense attorney. Notwithstanding, since it has been proven that Mr. Domingo Revelles did not have defense counsel during his pre-indictment statement, when he was already considered a suspect of committing a crime, the Commission finds that the State of Ecuador violated the right of defense established in Article 8.2.d and 8.2.e of the American Convention, in connection with Article 1.1 of the same instrument, to the detriment of Mr. Eusebio Domingo Revelles. 3. Right to Information on Consular Assistance 196. In its advisory opinion on The Right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of Due Process of Law, the Inter-American Court ruled that the right of a foreign national detainee to information on consular assistance, as established in Article 36 of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, is an individual right and a minimum guarantee protected within the Inter-American system.171 197. In the case of Vélez Loor v. Panama, the Inter-American Court held that from the standpoint of the rights of the detained person, there are three essential components of this right: 1) the right to be informed of his rights under the Vienna Convention; 172 2) the right to have effective access to communicate with a consular official; and 3) the right to the assistance itself.173 198. The foregoing components have been examined by the Court as they pertain to Articles 7.4 and 8.2 of the American Convention. In this regard the Court has held that in order “to prevent arbitrary detentions,” the person detained must be notified “of the right to establish contact with a third party, such as a consular official, to inform them that he is in the State’s custody. This must be carried out in conjunction with the obligations under Article 7.4 of the Convention.”174 199. Additionally, with respect to Article 8.2 of the Convention, the Court has established that when the arrested person is not a national of the State in which he is held in custody, the notification to consular assistance is based on a fundamental guarantee of the access to justice and allows the effective exercise of the right to defense, given that the consul may assist the detainee in various aspects of defense, such as granting or hiring legal counsel, obtaining evidence in the country of origin, corroborating the conditions under which legal assistance is provided and observing the situation of the accused while he is in prison.” 175 200. With regard to the right to information on consular assistance, the Court has reiterated that the detainee must be notified of this right “at the time he is deprived of his freedom and before he makes his 171 See IA Court of HR, The Right to Information on Consular Assistance under Guarantees of Due Process of the Law, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99 of October 1, 1999. Series A No. 16, paras. 84 and 124. 172 Thus in the case of Vélez Loor v. Brazil the Court held that a detained foreign national has the right to be informed of his right: 1) for the host State to advise the competent consular office about his situation; and 2) for the host State to convey without delay ―any communication addressed to the consular office - by the detained person. See: Article 36.1.b of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Document (A/CONF.25/12) (1963) of April 24, 1963, in force as of March 19, 1967, and has been in effect for Ecuador since that date (as it ratified it on March 11, 1965). This notification must be given to him prior to making his first statement. The right to Information on Consular Assistance in the Framework of the Guarantees of Due Process of Law, Advisory Opinion OC-16/99 of October 1, 1999. Series A No. 16, para. 106. As well as other rights that someone who is deprived of his liberty has, ―this constitutes a mechanism to prevent illegal or arbitrary detentions from the very moment the person is deprived of his liberty and, additionally, guarantees the right to a defense of the individual.” 173 IA Court of HR. Case of Vélez Loor v. Panamá. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 23, 2010 Series C No. 218, para. 153. 174 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Document (A/CONF.25/12) (1963) of April 24, 1963, in force as of March 19, 1967, and has been in effect for Ecuador since that date (as it ratified it on March 11, 1965). IA Court of HR. Case of Vélez Loor v. Panamá. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 23, 2010 Series C No. 218, para. 154. 175 IA Court of HR. Case of Vélez Loor v. Panamá. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 23, 2010 Series C No. 218, para. 154. 46