perpetrators used violence against him when they took him by the throat during his arrest and forced him to get into the police truck, when they obliged him to clean the excrement in his cell; when they beat and kicked his entire body and, finally, when they forced him to sign a declaration absolving the perpetrators from any responsibility; (b) these acts caused him physical and mental pain, as proved by the photographs showing the bruises on his body and the medical certificate describing his injuries; (c) they were committed against him as punishment, particularly because he was a human rights defender; (d) they were perpetrated by State agents, and (e) “they were degrading because he was severely humiliated in front of others.” In light of the foregoing, the Commission stated that “the acts committed against Mr. Fleury meet the criteria of torture and cruel, inhuman, and degrading treatment.” The Commission also indicated that “the actions of the State agents reveal a lack of respect for the inherent dignity of Mr. Fleury, also protected by Article 5(2) of the Convention.” 66. The Commission added that ”the facts and evidence in the case reveal the anguish and fear experienced by Mr. Fleury’s family because they witnessed the abuse perpetrated by the State agents.” In addition, the members of the family were obliged to live apart for long periods of time fearing reprisals by the perpetrators. The Inter-American Commission indicated that “the members of Mr. Fleury’s family were also victims of the acts of the State agents,” because his wife and children suffered severe anguish, fear and anxiety, which violated their right to physical, mental and moral integrity protected by Article [5(1)] of the American Convention, [in relation to Article 1(1) thereof].” 67. The representatives indicated that they agreed with the Commission, particularly in characterizing the acts committed against Mr. Fleury as torture. They also indicated that, under both domestic49 and international law, the standards for the use of force prohibit its use unless it is strictly necessary and proportionate. In addition, they stated that the torture of Mr. Fleury “constituted an excessive use of force, because he had never threatened the safety of the police station or its officials.” As for the detention conditions at the Bon Repos Police Station (supra paras. 35 and 36), the representatives observed that they did not meet the minimum standards for treatment of persons deprived of liberty, or the provisions of the Haitian Constitution, and constituted “supplementary” violations of Article 5(1) and 5(2) of the American Convention. B. Considerations of the Court 68. Article 5(1) of the Convention embodies in general terms the right to personal integrity of a physical, mental and moral nature; while Article 5(2) specifically establishes the absolute prohibition to subject any one to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment, as well as the right of all persons deprived of their liberty to be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person.50 The Court understands Every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected. No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman, or degrading punishment or treatment. All persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person. 49 Article 25 of the Constitution of Haiti establishes that: Any unnecessary force or restraint to arrest a person or to keep him under arrest is prohibited, as is any psychological pressure or physical brutality, especially during interrogation. 50 The principles contained in Article 5(2) of the Convention are also included in Articles 7 and 10(1) of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (hereinafter “the Covenant”), which state, respectively, that, “[n]o one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment [...],” and that 19