CAT/OP/CRI/CSPRO/1 D. Prisoner privileges (para. 30) 35. The drafting of a sentence enforcement law involves the participation of several institutions, including the Ministry of Justice and Peace. Bill No. 21800, introduced by the deputy Carolina Hidalgo, has thus been drawn up jointly by various actors. An interinstitutional working group, composed of representatives of the three branches of government, has been established with a view to advancing the legislative process, ultimately to achieve a law that will serve as a tool for the protection of fundamental rights and settle a historical debt owed to persons deprived of their liberty. 36. The professional assistance provided by the prison system to persons deprived of their liberty is centred on individual and group support processes (or rehabilitation programmes, the term used by the Subcommittee), whose purpose is to equip prisoners with the necessary tools for their social reintegration. This approach is reflected in the enforcement bill, which establishes the obligation of prison authorities to provide technical assistance. The bill also contains measures to improve the complaints procedure, which is currently overseen by the sentence enforcement judge, in cases where the prisoner believes that his or her access to technical assistance is being obstructed in an irregular manner. 37. The Public Prosecution Service has consented to work with the Legislative Assembly on the drafting of an enforcement law with a view to reducing the scope for discretion of the prison authorities in granting prisoner privileges. The Public Defence Service will continue to promote the speedy adoption of a special law on this subject. E. Transparency and access to information (para. 32) 38. The Ministry of Justice and Peace has indicated its willingness to address this recommendation. Its information technology department will apply a strategy of keeping information up to date and accessible to the population. IV. Situation of persons deprived of their liberty A. Criminal investigation police and security forces (paras. 34, 36, 38 and 40) 39. The Subcommittee’s observation that in some situations persons were kept in police holding cells in excess of the six-hour maximum, especially on weekends and when arrests took place at night, has been duly noted and the necessary steps will be taken to ensure that such situations do not arise in the future. 40. State responsibility is triggered when the maximum period of detention is arbitrarily exceeded; in such cases, an application for the remedy of amparo may be submitted to the constitutional authority. In this connection, the Public Defence Service has brought legal action before the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court on behalf of persons who have been kept in holding cells beyond the maximum period of detention. The Public Prosecution Service establishes working hours throughout the country in such a way as to ensure that staff are on hand to process all measures relating to deprivation of liberty efficiently. 41. On 22 April 2019, following up on the Subcommittee’s recommendation in accordance with its remit, the Ministry of Public Security issued Directive No. MSP-DMDVURFP-DGFP-02-2019, updating its Protocol for the Processing, Transport and Treatment of Persons in Police Custody. The Protocol establishes the maximum number of hours that a detainee may be held in a police cell before he or she must be brought before the competent authority. 42. Article 91 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of Costa Rica (Act No. 7594) provides that an official of the Public Prosecution Service must take a statement from the accused 6 GE.20-17766