48 | Towards the Closure of Guantanamo 92. 93. 94. 72 73 74 75 76 77 instruments to which they are bound is regulated by the generally recognized principles of proportionality, necessity and nondiscrimination. 72 According to the Inter-American Commission, a State might “be justified in subjecting individuals to periods of preventative or administrative detention for a period longer than would be permissible under ordinary circumstances, where their extended detention is demonstrated to be strictly necessary by reason of the emergency situation.” 73 Any such detention may, however, continue for only that period necessary in light of the situation and must remain subject to non-derogable protections. These include “the requirement that the grounds and procedures for the detention be prescribed by law, the right to be informed of the reasons for the detention, prompt access to legal counsel, family and, where necessary or applicable, medical and consular assistance, prescribed limits upon the length of prolonged detention, and maintenance of a central registry of detainees.” 74 These protections are also considered to include appropriate judicial review mechanisms to supervise detentions, which must be promptly available upon arrest or detention and at reasonable intervals when detention is extended. The IACHR, together with several United Nations’ mandate holders, has established that the continuing and indefinite detention of individuals without the right to due process in Guantanamo is arbitrary and constitutes a clear violation of international law. 75 This situation is particularly clear with respect to those prisoners who have been cleared for transfer by the Government of the United States of America. With regard to the situation of detainees at Guantanamo, the IACHR has also emphasized that reasons of public security “cannot serve as a pretext for the indefinite detention of individuals, without any charge whatsoever” and that when these security measures are extended beyond a reasonable time they become serious violations of the right to personal liberty. 76 In this sense, the United Nations Committee against Torture has condemned prisoners’ treatment at Guantanamo, noting that indefinite detention constitutes per se a violation of the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. 77 In addition, a 2006 report adopted by the UN Economic and Social Council on the situation of detainees in Guantanamo Bay, regrettably still relevant, indicates that, “the objective of the ongoing detention is not primarily to prevent combatants from taking up arms against the United States IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.116.Doc.5 rev.1, October 22, 2002, paras. 50 and 51. IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.116.Doc.5 rev.1, October 22, 2002, para. 140. IACHR, Report on Terrorism and Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.116.Doc.5 rev.1, October 22, 2002, para. 139. IACHR, Press Release 29/13: IACHR, UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, UN Rapporteur on Torture, UN Rapporteur on Human Rights and Counter-Terrorism, and UN Rapporteur on Health Reiterate Need to End the Indefinite Detention of Individuals at Guantanamo Naval Base in Light of Current Human Rights Crisis, May 1, 2013. IACHR, Resolution No. 2/11, Regarding the Situation of the Detainees at Guantanamo Bay, Precautionary Measure 259-02, July 22, 2011. UN Committee Against Torture (CAT), UN Committee against Torture: Conclusions and Recommendations, United States of America, 25 July 2006, CAT/C/USA/CO/2, para 22. Organization of American States | OAS