health has been violated in regard to unwarranted interference with their health. The Commission thus finds a violation of Article 16 (1). 243. In relation to the duty to fulfil the right to health, the Charter places a duty on States to ensure that people receive medical attention. In the Interrights v Egypt case, 71 the Commission held that since the Victims all received medical attention after they were assaulted, the “Respondent State fulfilled its obligation under the sub-Article to ensure that the Victims received medical attention after the injuries sustained”. 244. In its jurisprudence the Commission has further held that “the responsibility of the government is heightened in cases where the individual is in its custody and therefore someone whose integrity and well-being is completely dependent on the activities of the authorities”.72 This is further confirmed by the Guidelines and Principles on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, which provide that the minimum core obligations of the right to health include “the right of access to health facilities, goods and services on a nondiscriminatory basis, especially for vulnerable or marginalised groups” and that “that prisoners and other persons deprived of their liberty, under any form of detention, have access to conditions of detention consistent with human dignity and the highest attainable standard of health”. 73 The Luanda Guidelines further provide for a duty on the State to provide adequate standards of physical and mental healthcare in detention.74 245. In Communication 379/09 Monim Elgak, Osman Hummeida and Amir Suliman (represented by FIDH and OMCT) v. Sudan the Commission held that while the Victim who was in jail was provided with medical care, it was inadequate to guarantee his health and thus found that “the treatment still left him in a situation which was both life threatening and jeopardized his health. The Commission considers that the State in this circumstance violated his right to Communication 323/06: Egyptian Initiative for Personal Rights and INTERIGHTS v Egypt. Communication 105/93-128/94-130/94-152/96 Media Rights Agenda, Constitutional Rights Project, Media Rights Agenda and Constitutional Rights Project v. Nigeria, para 91; Communication 54/91-61/9198/93-164/97_196/97-210/98 : Malawi Africa Association, Amnesty International, Ms Sarr Diop, Union interafricaine des droits de l'Homme and RADDHO, Collectif des veuves et ayants-Droit, Association mauritanienne des droits de l'Homme v. Mauritanie, paras 121-122. 73 Guidelines and Principles on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights in the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights, para 67(a), (kk). 74 Guidelines on the Conditions of Arrest, Police Custody and Pre-Trial Detention in Africa, para 25 (g). 71 72 69