48 * * * 121. On the other hand, the representatives of the alleged victim argued the violation of Article 17(1) of the Convention, which enshrines the Protection of the Family, adducing that the transfer of Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez to the National Penitentiary of Támara worsened his separation with regard to his next of kin and his community. They indicated that the alleged victim could not carry out work activities while detained, he left his family unprotected, and he was not with them during difficult times. Neither the Commission nor the State referred to this violation. 122. The facts argued by the representatives as violations of Article 17 of the Convention were already examined in relation to the right to personal integrity of Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez and his next of kin (supra paras. 113 through 120), reason for which the Court will not issue a ruling regarding the alleged violation to this precept. X VIOLATION OF ARTICLES 8 AND 25 OF THE AMERICAN CONVENTION IN RELATION WITH ARTICLE 1(1) OF THE SAME (Right to a Fair Trial, Right to Judicial Protection, and Obligation to Respect Rights) 123. Arguments of the Commission: a) regarding the reasonable time, the States must pay special attention when dealing with trials where there are people subject to preventive detention. The criminal procedure followed against Mr. Alfredo López Álvarez lasted more than seventy months, reason for which the State has violated in detriment of the alleged victim the right to a reasonable time for the judgment; b) the factual and judicial simplicity of the charges presented against the accused, and his procedural behavior of constantly pushing the procedure forward through recourses, including the habeas corpus, so that the domestic court would issue a ruling regarding the rights argued and would grant him his freedom, contrasts the behavior of the judicial authorities, which during the six years of process did not prove the effective participation of the alleged victim in the crime he was charged with, nor the existence of the body of the crime; c) the prolonged preventive detention to which Mr. López Álvarez has been subject, implies that the State has presumed his guilt and has treated him as guilty of a crime, in violation of the principle of presumption of innocence enshrined in the Convention, that is also stipulated in Article 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedures; d) the Honduran courts acquitted the defendant, after six years of trial and imprisonment. During this entire period of time they did not attend to the arguments presented by the defense counsel of the alleged victim. The remedies presented by him were unsuccessful, thus existing a violation to the right to a fair trial, and e) the alleged victim was not assisted by an attorney during his statement before the Tribunal.