- 83 - IX-2 RIGHTS TO PERSONAL LIBERTY318 AND TO JUDICIAL GUARANTEES,319 IN RELATION TO THE OBLIGATION TO RESPECT AND TO ENSURE THESE RIGHTS, WITH REGARD TO THE DETENTIONS ON MAY 3 AND 4, 2006 A. Arguments of the parties and of the Commission 225. The Commission argued that the detention of the eleven women victims in this case was unlawful and, therefore, contrary to Article 7(2) of the Convention because in contravened the provisions of the Mexican Constitution as it was not based on a reasoned order issued by a competent authority. It indicated that, although, in some of its briefs, the State had argued that they had been detained in flagrante delicto, it had not justified this assertion and, to the contrary, the facts reveal the contrary. Also, it considered that the detentions were arbitrary and contrary to Article 7(3) of the Convention owing to the acts of physical, psychological and sexual violence perpetrated against the victims, both at the time of their detention, and during the transfer to and entry into the CEPRESO. Furthermore, it affirmed that Article 7(4) and paragraphs (b), (d) and (e) of Article 8(2) had been violated because the women were not advised of the reasons for their detention; they made their first statements without knowing the charges or the acts attributed to them, and “without having a trusted defense counsel or, if this was not possible, a counsel provided by the State.” 226. The representatives indicated that the deprivation of the women’s’ personal liberty violated Article 7(1) because it took place “in the context of mass detentions, merely based on the fact that the victims were in the area” and “without there necessarily being any connection between the persons detained and the protests, and in particular with regard to any unlawful conduct.” They indicated that, in each case, the detention was unlawful because it did not comply with the pertinent requirements indicated in the Constitution, and also “most of the women were detained in private houses during unauthorized searches.” They also asserted that the detentions were arbitrary because the use of physical, psychological and sexual violence “as a methodology to carry out arrests, in the moments following the deprivation of liberty, and during the transfer, was not reasonable, predictable or proportionate and did not seek to achieve any valid purpose.” In addition, they argued that Article 7(4) and paragraphs (b), (d) and (e) of Article 8(2) had been violated because: (i) the women were not informed of the reasons for their detention, or (ii) notified “clearly of the charges against them and of the facts and arguments on which those charges were based before their first appearance before the Public Prosecution Service”, and (iii) “they did not have defense counsel from the start of the investigations against them, or before their first appearance before the Public Prosecution Service.” 318 Article 7(1) of the Convention establishes that: “1. Every person has the right to personal liberty and security.” The relevant part of Article 8 of the Convention establishes that: “Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 2. Every person accused of a criminal offense has the right to be presumed innocent so long as his guilt has not been proven according to law. During the proceedings, every person is entitled, with full equality, to the following minimum guarantees: […] (b) prior notification in detail to the accused of the charges against him; […] (d) the right of the accused to defend himself personally or to be assisted by legal counsel of his own choosing, and to communicate freely and privately with his counsel; (e) the inalienable right to be assisted by counsel provided by the state, paid or not as the domestic law provides, if the accused does not defend himself personally or engage his own counsel within the time period established by law.” 319