to health. Therefore, the Commission finds that the State is responsible for the violation of articles 11(2), 11(3), and 26 of the American Convention, in conjunction with articles 1(1) and 2 of the Convention, to the detriment of Manuela. 2. On the healthcare provided to Manuela in custody and her death while in custody 138. In this section, the Commission will analyze whether with regard to Manuela’s situation, the State acted in accordance with its international obligations from the time she was taken into custody. On this point, the IACHR reiterates the previous considerations on the applicability of Article 26 of the Convention regarding the right to health, adding the pertinent general considerations regarding individuals deprived of liberty. 139. The IACHR recalls that, with regard to individuals who have been deprived of liberty, the State has the special position of guarantor, as prison officials have significant or total control over people in their custody. This is as a result of the special subordinate relationship between the person deprived of liberty and the State, characterized by the particular intensity with which the State can control their rights and obligations and by the specific circumstances of imprisonment, in which deprivation of liberty prevents prisoners from meeting, on their own, a series of basic needs that are essential for living dignified life, in terms of what is possible in such circumstances.135 140. The right to life is directly linked to the right to health. With regard to individuals deprived of liberty, health services must be provided under equivalent conditions—that is, conditions comparable to those enjoyed by patients on the outside. The State has an obligation to guarantee the physical and mental health of people deprived of liberty, which involves, among other things: (i) an initial medical exam to evaluate the health status of an inmate and provide any medical attention that may be needed;136 (ii) adequate, timely, and—where necessary—specialized medical treatment that addresses the special needs of the detained persons in question, 137 including appropriate diets, physical therapy, rehabilitation, and other necessary specialized facilities; (iii) when a medical condition requires it, checkups must be regular and systematic and intended to cure the detainee’s illnesses; (iv) the individuals deprived of liberty who suffer from serious, chronic, or terminal illnesses must not be held in prison facilities, except for when States can ensure that the units are equipped for medical care so as to provide adequate treatment.138 141. With regard to the violations of the right to life attributable to the State for failure to provide health care services, the IACHR has underscored that for the purposes of determining a State’s international responsibility for failure to comply with one of the principles associated with the right to health and connected to the right to life, it is not necessary to unequivocally demonstrate the cause of death, but rather determine if measures existed that the State could have reasonably taken (but did not) to provide an individual with the treatment necessitated by his or her condition. 139 For its part, the Inter-American Court has indicated that failure to provide basic healthcare services when there is a high probability that adequate care would prolong the life of a person is a violation of the right to life.140 As the Inter-American Court has underscored, a failure Inter-American Court, Case of Chinchilla Sandoval v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 29, 2016. Series C No. 312, párr.168. 136 See IACHR, Report No. 7/14, Case 12,739. Merits. María Inés Chinchilla Sandoval et al. Guatemala, para. 126 and following; IACHR, Report on the Human Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty in the Americas, OEA/Ser.L/B/II.Doc.64, December 31, 2011, paras. 163 and following; United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, adopted by the First UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1995 and approved by the UN Economic and Social Council in resolutions 663C (XXIV) of July 31, 1957, and 2076 (LXVII) of May 13, 1977; Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under Any Form of Detention or Imprisonment. Adopted by the General Assembly in resolution 43/173 of December 9, 1988, Principle 24. 137 Inter-American Court, Case of Chinchilla Sandoval v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 29, 2016. Series C No. 312, párr.171. 138 Inter-American Court, Case of Chinchilla Sandoval v. Guatemala. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 29, 2016. Series C No. 312, párr.184. 139 IACHR, Report No. 1/16, Case 12.695. Merits. Vinicio Antonio Poblete Vilches and relatives. Chile. April 13, 2016, para. 135. 140 Inter-American Court, Case of Poblete Vilches et al. v. Chile. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of March 8, 2018. Series C No. 349, párr.151. 135 26