42 run by MINUSTAH because, according to the report prepared by the Penitentiary doctor, his state of health had deteriorated and he was in a critical condition. On April 21, 2005, he was transferred from the MINUSTAH military hospital to the Annex of the National Penitentiary, where he remained until July 27, 2006. According to his statement, the detention conditions in the Annex were a little more tolerable than in the National Penitentiary, although he still received open and constant threats from the prison guards.188 136. According to Mr. Neptune’s testimony, when the guards entered his cell on April 22, 2005, to take him to appear before the court in Saint-Marc, he tried to resist, because he did not know whether they had come to abduct, kill or torture him.189 He indicated that he was driven in the back of a van along a road full of potholes in the heat of the day, despite his critical condition owing to the hunger strike he had started five days before without medical assistance.190 His health remained critical, “because he had begun a new hunger strike on April 17, 2005, and from April 29, 2005, to July 27, 2006, he had refused to eat and only accepted water. On May 15, 2005, he began to receive vitamins, salt and sugar orally, under medical supervision.”191 His physical condition gradually deteriorated; he did not want or receive routine medical attention. Mr. Neptune was hospitalized upon his release on humanitarian grounds.192 137. The Court also finds that it has been proved and not disputed that, during the time Yvon Neptune was detained in the National Penitentiary and subsequently in the Annex, there was a general context of serious shortcomings in prison conditions in Haiti, as well as a lack of security in almost all the country’s detention centers; this was pointed out by several international organizations and agencies.193 There was extreme overcrowding, lack of beds, badly ventilated and unhygienic cells, few sanitary installations, poor food, a scarcity of drinking water, lack of medical attention and serious problems of hygiene, illnesses and bacterial diseases. The State did not dispute the Commission’s allegations, according to which: “[t]he extreme overcrowding, unhygienic and unsanitary conditions and poor inmate diet at the National Penitentiary did not even approximate the standards set in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners”; 194 and “[d]espite repeated outbreaks of violence in the National Penitentiary, the State kept its inadequate structure intact.”195 138. From the above, it is clear that Yvon Neptune’s detention conditions, in particular in the National Penitentiary, constituted inhumane treatment because they did not comply with the minimum material requirements of decent treatment pursuant to Article 5(2) of the 188 Cf. Statement made before notary public (affidavit) by Yvon Neptune, supra note 6, para. 22 (folio 453); statement made before notary public (affidavit) by Ronald Saint-Jean, supra note 185, para. 15 (folio 431), and application submitted by the Commission, supra note 3, para. 47 (folio 112). 189 Cf. Statement made before notary public (affidavit) by Yvon Neptune, supra note 6 para. 23 (folios 453- 454). 190 Cf. Statement made before notary public (affidavit) by Yvon Neptune, supra note 6 para. 6 (folio 449). 191 Application submitted by the Commission, supra note 3, para. 48 (folio 112). 192 Application submitted by the Commission, supra note 3, para. 49 (folio 112). 193 Cf. Application submitted by the Commission, supra nota 3, paras. 58-59 (folios 115-116). 194 Cf. Application submitted by the Commission, supra note 3, para. 62 (folio 117). 195 Cf. Application submitted by the Commission, supra note 3, para. 77 (folio 120).