rights to personal integrity and liberty. It therefore applies to suspects of all crimes, including terrorist offences.493 Article 5 of the ACHR provides in part: “3. Punishment shall not be extended to any person other than the criminal. 4. Accused persons shall, save in exceptional circumstances, be segregated from convicted persons, and shall be subject to separate treatment appropriate to their status as unconvicted persons. 3 The Inter-american Regional System Article 27(2) of the ACHR provides that, even in emergency situations, States parties may not suspend a number of rights, including the right to humane treatment, or “the judicial guarantees essential for the protection of such rights.” The Inter-American Court has been called upon to define the nature of such guarantees in two Advisory Opinions. In its Advisory Opinion on the right of habeas corpus, (i.e. the right of legal recourse to challenge detention), which is guaranteed under Articles 7(6) and 25(1) of the ACHR, the Court stated that “habeas corpus performs a vital role in ensuring that a person’s life and physical integrity are respected, in preventing his disappearance or the keeping of his whereabouts secret and in protecting him against torture or other cruel, inhumane [sic], or degrading punishment or treatment,” and cannot therefore be suspended under any circumstances.494 The same reasoning applies to other procedural guarantees, in particular those specified in Article 8 of the ACHR.495 Article 8 provides for the right to a hearing, the presumption of innocence, the right to be assisted by an interpreter, the right to be notified in detail of all charges and the right to defence and free communication with counsel. 5. Minors while subject to criminal proceedings shall be separated from adults and brought before specialized tribunals, as speedily as possible, so that they may be treated in accordance with their status as minors.” Thus, many of the procedural safeguards that in other systems are “read into” general articles prohibiting ill-treatment are explicitly laid out in the InterAmerican system. However, the Court has also found a number of other specific duties. For example, in De la Cruz Flores v Peru, the Court established that, Ibid. §§109-112. The Inter-American Court cited jurisprudence of the European Court in this regard. See §108. 494 Habeas corpus in Emergency Situations (Articles 27(2), 25(1) and 7(6) American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-8/87 of 30 January 1987, IACHR (Series A) No. 8, §35. 495 Judicial Guarantees in States of Emergency (Articles 27.2, 25 and 8 of the American Convention on Human Rights), Advisory Opinion OC-9/87 of 6 October 1987, IACHR (Series A) No. 9. 493 109