138. The State argued that “the legal classification of the facts corresponds to the domestic authorities.” Nevertheless, it indicated that to constitute the crime of torture, a special intentionality must exist, which had not been proved in this case. It also indicated that “it cannot be affirmed that the legal definition of torture – as it was regulated at the time of the facts – had a decisive impact on the different decisions of the prosecution service that decided not to expand the investigation to include the crime of torture. On this basis, the State considered that it was not appropriate to declare that the legal definition of torture be amended.” It also clarified that the legal definition of torture had been amended in 2017. B. Considerations of the Court 139. Article 5(1) of the Convention establishes the right to personal integrity, both physical and also mental and moral, in general terms. While Article 5(2) establishes, more specifically, the absolute prohibition to subject someone to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and also the right of all persons deprived of their liberty to be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. The Court understands that any violation of Article 5(2) of the American Convention necessarily entails the violation of Article 5(1) of this instrument.171 140. The Court has established that torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment are absolutely and strictly prohibited by international human rights law. This prohibition is absolute and non-derogable, even in the most difficult circumstances, such as war, threat of war, actions to combat terrorism and any other crimes, state of siege or emergency, internal conflict or unrest, suspension of constitutional guarantees, internal political instability or other public emergencies or catastrophes,172 and now belongs to the domain of international jus cogens.173 Both universal174 and regional175 treaties establish this prohibition and the non-derogable right not to be subjected to any form of torture. 141. Furthermore, in cases involving any form of sexual violence, the Court has indicated that violations of personal integrity entail a violation of a person’s privacy, protected by Article 11 Cf. Case of Yvon Neptune v. Haiti. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 6, 2008. Series C No. 180, para. 129, and Case of López et al. v. Argentina. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, supra, para. 179. 171 Cf. Case of Lori Berenson Mejía v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 25, 2004. Series C No. 119, para. 100, and Case of López et al. v. Argentina. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs, supra, para. 180. 172 Cf. Case of Maritza Urrutia v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 27, 2003. Series C No. 103, para. 92, and Case of Valenzuela Ávila v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 11, 2019. Series C No. 386, para. 180. In this regard, see, Article 53 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, which establishes: “Treaties conflicting with a peremptory norm of general international law (jus cogens): A treaty is void if, at the time of its conclusion, it conflicts with a peremptory norm of general international law. For the purposes of the present Convention, a peremptory norm of general international law is a norm accepted and recognized by the international community of States as a whole as a norm from which no derogation is permitted and which can be modified only by a subsequent norm of general international law having the same character.” 173 Cf. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 7; Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Article 2; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 37, and International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of all Migrant Workers and Members of their Families, Article 10. 174 Cf. Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, Articles 1 and 5; African Charter of Human and Peoples’ Rights, Article 5; African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Article 16; Convention of Belém do Pará, Article 4, and European Convention on Human Rights, Article 3. 175 37