45 234. In the instant case, the lack of judicial control is particularly serious because Eduardo José lost his life while in the custody of police officers who arrested him unlawfully and arbitrarily, without a judge being given the opportunity to rule on the lawfulness of his arrest. As will be indicated infra with respect to the right to life, compliance with Venezuela’s international obligations regarding the judicial control of the arrest of Eduardo José, for the purpose of releasing him or adopting special measures to protect his condition as a minor child, could have represented one of the many mechanisms the State had to prevent the fatal outcome of his death. D. The right to humane treatment and the duty to provide special protection for children with respect to what Eduardo José Landaeta Mejías experienced while in State custody. 235. With regard to the rights enshrined in Articles 5.1 and 5.2 of the Convention, the Court has repeatedly held that “International Human Rights Law strictly prohibits torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment. The absolute prohibition of torture, both physical and psychological, is currently part of the domain of the international jus cogens. Said prohibition remains valid even under the most difficult circumstances, such as war, threat of war, the fight against terrorism and other crimes, stage of siege or state of emergency, civil commotion or domestic conflict, suspension of constitutional 272 guarantees, domestic political instability or other public emergencies or catastrophes.” 236. In addition, the Court has stated that various international and regional treaties establish that prohibition and enshrine the irrevocable right not to be tortured. Similarly, various international 273 instruments enshrine this right and reaffirm that prohibition, including international humanitarian law. 237. Regarding the duty to guarantee under Article 5 of the American Convention, the Court has held that this embodies the duty of the State to investigate possible acts of torture or other cruel, 274 inhuman or degrading treatment. In addition, the Court has indicated that In the light of the general obligation to guarantee all persons under their jurisdiction the human rights enshrined in the Convention, established in Article 1(1) of the same, along with the right to humane treatment pursuant to Article 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) of said treaty, there is a state obligation to start ex officio and immediately an effective investigation that allows it to identify, 272 I/A Court HR., Bueno Alves Case. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C, No. 164. para. 76; I/A Court HR., Miguel Castro Castro Prison Case. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C, No. 160. para. 271; and I/A Court HR., Baldeón García Case. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C, No. 147. para. 117. 273 I/A Court HR., Bueno Alves Case. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C, No. 164. para. 77. Citing: International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Art. 7; Convention against Torture and Other cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Art. 2; Convention on the Rights of the Child, Art. 37, and the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migratory Workers and the Members of Their Families, Art. 10; Inter-American Convention to Prevent and Punish Torture, Art. 2; African Charter on the Rights of Men and of People, Art. 5; African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child, Art. 16; InterAmerican Convention on the Prevention, Punishment and Eradication of Violence against Women (Convention of Belém do Pará), Art. 4, and European Convention for the Protection of Fundamental Freedoms, Art. 3; Set of principles for the protection of all individuals subject to any form of detention or imprisonment, Principle 6; Code of conduct for law enforcement officers, Art. 5; UN Rules on Juveniles Deprived of Liberty, Rule 87(a); Declaration on the Human Rights of Individuals who are not Nationals of the Country in which they Live, Art. 6; UN Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (Beijing Rules), Rule 17.3; Declaration on the Protection of Women and Children in Emergency and Armed Conflict, Art. 4, and Guidelines of the European Council of Ministers on Human Rights and the Fight against Terrorism, Guidelines IV; and Art. 3 common to the four Geneva Conventions; Geneva Convention governing war prisoners (Convention III), Arts. 49, 52, 87 and 89, 97; Geneva Convention relative to the protection of civilian persons in time of war (Convention IV), Arts. 40, 51, 95, 96, 100 and 119; Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, on protection of victims in international armed conflict (Protocol I), Art. 75.2.ii, and Additional Protocol to the Geneva Conventions of August 121, 1949, on protection of victims of non-international armed conflict (Protocol II), Art. 4.2.a. 274 I/A Court HR. Escué Zapata v. Colombia Case. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C, No. 165. para. 73; I/A Court HR., Case of the Pueblo Bello Massacre. (Interpretation of the Judgment of Merits, Reparations and Costs) (Art. 67 of the American Convention on Human Rights). Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C, No. 159. para. 142; I/A Court HR., Bueno Alves Case. Judgment of May 11, 2007. Series C, No. 164. para. 88.