CAT/OP/CHL/1/Add.1 criminal justice in order to reduce the number of persons deprived of their liberty and reverse the rise in the prison population. 69. Following the fire in San Miguel prison in 2010, the Government was reminded of the importance of addressing the situation in Chilean prisons and has undertaken a process of legal and administrative reform to that end. Six years after the tragic event, changes inspired by the Subcommittee’s recommendations have been introduced. 70. An example of this has been the publication of Act No. 20587, which modifies the parole regime and introduces the possibility of replacing the custodial penalty associated with non-payment of a fine with the non-custodial penalty of community service. Furthermore, the Parole Board, which is composed of members of the judiciary, has been empowered to decide whether to grant parole in accordance with objective criteria. Since the entry into force of the Act in June 2012, significant changes have been made: Table 1 Total number of cases in which parole was granted (2010–2016) 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016* 795 1 204 2 276 3 561 3 352 2 276 2 258 Source: Department for Prison Oversight, Prison Service. * First half of 2016 only. 71. In this connection, it is also worth mentioning Act No. 20588, which granted a general commutation to persons deprived of their liberty who had served part of their sentences, provided that their release did not pose a threat to public safety.26 Thus, 4,008 people (460 women and 3,584 men) benefited from the commutation. Lastly, Act No. 20603, of June 2012, establishing new non-custodial penalties, introduced a system whereby convicts could serve their sentences outside of prison, provided that they did not represent a danger to society and enrolled in reintegration programmes and who could potentially be monitored remotely by means of technologies used by developed countries. 72. In recent years, the public policy on prisons has had a positive impact from a human rights perspective, having brought about a reduction in the population of custodial institutions and an increase in the population who benefit from non-custodial sentences. Table 2 Convicted population in a custodial system vs. an open system (2010–2016) Type of population 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016* Convicted population closed system 42 868 43 006 40 734 37 059 34 180 32 406 27 877 Convicted population open system 54 872 53 434 51 420 50 150 50 773 56 060 58 946 Source: Prison Service. * The data for 2016 cover the period ending 31 October. 73. Thus, as requested by the Subcommittee, from 2010, the rise in the number of persons deprived of their liberty in custodial institutions has been reversed, which is in keeping with the measures mentioned above. This is a dynamic process, however, in which different actors are involved. Accordingly, the executive branch will continuously monitor statistics in this area, primarily to study the possible impact on the prison system of Act No. 20931, which facilitates the enforcement of penalties established for the crimes of theft, 26 GE.17-07762 The initiative covered women who, at the time of publication of the Act, had been convicted and deprived of their liberty and who had exhibited good behaviour and met other requirements; persons deprived of their liberty who, at that time, were serving a sentence with the right to supervised release; persons deprived of their liberty who were serving a sentence through night-time confinement; and lastly, foreign nationals deprived of their liberty. With regard to this last category, it should be noted that deprivation of liberty was replaced by special deportation to their country of origin. 15