CAT/OP/MEX/1/Add.2 341. Mexico is up to date with its reporting obligations towards the monitoring bodies, which is a reflection of its total commitment to the international human rights instruments. 342. In November 2012 the Mexican Government is to defend its consolidated fifth and sixth report on implementing the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment before the Committee against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment at its forty-second session. 343. That report was prepared on the basis of the new procedure established by the Committee against Torture for the presentation of periodic reports, the Mexican Government having been informed in 2009 by a note of the Secretary-General of the United Nations that the Committee against Torture had decided to implement a new optional reporting procedure entailing the preparation and adoption of lists of issues to be transmitted to States parties prior to the submission of their ensuing periodic report. 344. It was accordingly notified that the replies to that list would be treated as the fifth and sixth periodic report to be submitted under article 19 of the Convention. The new procedure was aimed primarily at States parties whose reports were due for submission after 2010, a situation which applied to Mexico. 345. In the inter-American sphere the Mexican Government cooperates with the different human rights bodies. This cooperation includes the recognition of the jurisdiction of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights to hear specific cases of alleged violations of human rights. 346. The Inter-American Court’s judgements have given rise to the adoption of a number of measures by the Mexican Government ranging from legislative reforms to public policies and the provision of redress. 347. For example, with regard to the implementation of the judgement handed down by the Inter-American Court on 26 November 2010 in the case of Cabrera García and Montiel Flores v. Mexico,17 a compliance report was submitted on 21 December 2011 by the Mexican Government, setting out the efforts that it was making to carry out the judgement. From the State’s viewpoint, full compliance has been achieved with respect to aspects such as publishing the verdict and granting redress to the victims and significant progress has been made in connection with measures to ensure non-recurrence, such as the organization of training courses and steps to establish a national register of arrests. As regards other aspects, such the conduct of an investigation into the facts and the legislative reforms ordered by the Inter-American Court, major compliance efforts are being pursued. X. Challenges to preventing torture in Mexico 348. In response to the recommendations issued by the Subcommittee, the Mexican Government has carried out various measures to eradicate any practices that could give rise to torture or ill-treatment by the authorities at places of detention. However, there are still major challenges in this area. 349. One of the main challenges, bearing in mind that Mexico is a federation, is to harmonize the criminal definition of torture at the national level in line with international 17 On 2 May 1999 Mr. Montiel and Mr. Cabrera were arrested in Pizotla, Guerrero, by military personnel for the offence of carrying firearms. They were subsequently released by the federal executive “on humanitarian grounds”. In its judgement the Inter-American Court held the State responsible for their unlawful arrest and the infliction of cruel treatment during their detention. GE.13-41196 (EXT) 91