211. The Court has already indicated in its case law that the essential content of Article 7 of the American Convention establishes the protection of the individual against any arbitrary or illegal interference by the State. 177 In turn, the Court has also indicated that this article has two types of regulations, one general and one specific. The general regulation is found in numeral 1, while the specific regulations is in numerals 2 to 7. Any violation of these numerals will necessarily entail the violation of Article 7(1) of the American Convention. 178 212. The specific regulation of Article 7 of the American Convention are guarantees that establish limits to the exercise of authority carried out by State officials, limits that apply to instruments of State control. Among them is detention, which must be applied in accordance with the other guarantees of the American Convention. It must also be of an exceptional nature and respect the principle of presumption of innocence, legality, necessity and proportionality, all essential principles for the proper functioning of a democratic society that respects human rights.179 In order to deprive someone of their liberty, it is necessary that the cause or reason for which they are detained be established in advance. In addition, this detention cannot be arbitrary, the person who suffers it must be informed of the reasons for their detention, the detainee must be brought before a judge as soon as possible, and he has the right to appeal to a competent judge or court for the purpose of assessing the legality of the detention. 213. The guarantee of legal detention in Guatemala is derived from its Political Constitution, in Article 6, which establishes: Lawful detention. No person may be arrested or imprisoned, except for a crime or misdemeanor and by virtue of an order issued in accordance with the law by a competent judicial authority. Cases of flagrante delicto or misdemeanor are excepted. Detainees must be brought before the competent judicial authority within a period not exceeding six hours, and may not be subject to any other authority. The official or agent of the authority who violates the provisions of this article will be sanctioned in accordance with the law, and the courts, ex officio, will initiate the corresponding process. 214. In addition, the Code of Criminal Procedure refers to arrest in Article 257 in the following terms: Article 257. (Apprehension). The police must arrest anyone caught committing an offence or pursue immediately after the commission of a punishable act. In the same case, any person is authorized to carry out the arrest and to prevent the punishable act from producing subsequent consequences. You must immediately deliver the apprehended person, together with the items collected, to the Public Prosecutor, the police or the nearest judicial authority. The Public Prosecutor may make a request to the judge or court for the apprehension of the accused when it deems that the requirements of the law are met and that their imprisonment is necessary, in which case it will place them at the disposal of the judge in charge of the investigation. The judge may order any substitute measure for detention, or dispense with it, in which case the accused will be released. 215. In accordance with the aforementioned articles 6 of the Constitution and 257 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there must be immediate judicial control of the detention, as a measure to avoid the arbitrariness or illegality of the measure. Cf. Case of the “Juvenile Reeducation Institute” v. Paraguay. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 2, 2004. Series C No. 112, para. 223, and Case of Amrhein et al. v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 351. 178 Cf. Case of Chaparro Álvarez and Lapo Iñiguez v. Ecuador. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 21, 2007. Series C No. 170, para. 51, and Case of Amrhein et al. v. Costa Rica, supra, para. 352. 179 Cf. Case of the "Juvenile Reeducation Institute" v. Paraguay, supra, para. 228, and Case of Norín Catrimán et al. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of May 29, 2014. Series C No. 279, para. 310. 177 52