de la Paz, Santa Catarina, Tierra Blanca, Victoria and Xichú; on 1 January 2013 in the region comprising the municipalities ofAbasolo, Cuerámaro, Huanímaro, Irapuato, Jaral del Progreso, Pénjamo, Pueblo Nuevo, Romita, Salamanca, Silao and Valle de Santiago; on 1 January 2014 in the region comprising the municipalities of Acambaro Apaseo Alto, Apaseo el Grande, Celaya, Coroneo, Cortazar, Jerécuaro, Moroleón, Salvatierra, Santa Cruz de Juventino Rosas, Santiago Maravatío, Tarandacuao, Tarimoro, Uriangato, Villagran and Yuriria; and on 1 January 2015 in the region comprising the municipalities of León, Manuel Bending, Purísima del Rincón and San Francisco del Rincón. Hidalgo 496.Implementation in Hidalgo is planned to take place in four stages over the 17 judicial districts. It is expected to begin in 2011 but dates have not as yet been given. The bill containing the Code of Criminal Procedure for the state of Hidalgo was sent by the head of the State Executive to the Congressional Safety and Justice Committee. The new Organic Act on the Prosecution Service, Organic Act on the Judiciary and the Crime Prevention Act were also enacted. 497.Significant progress has been made on infrastructure, training and the design of profiles for the new operators of the criminal justice system. Puebla 498.On 11 January 2011 the state congress unanimously approved the new Code of Criminal Procedure of the state of Puebla. In addition, amendments were made to its Constitution and there has been progress on training topics. Yucatán 499.On 19 March 2010 the constitutional and legislative reforms on security and justice on the implementation of the new adversarial system were passed in the plenary of congress. Transitional article 16 thereof states that the secondary legislation necessary for the proper functioning of the new oral adversarial system, provided for in articles 2, 62, 63, 64, 73, 85 bis, 86 and 87 of the reform decree, must be approved and published no later than 31 May 2011. 500.Initiatives to amend secondary legislation have already been prepared and passed to the Commission for Implementing the Reform on Security and Justice and are expected to be approved in the first quarter of 2011. 501.States at the planning stage have made the following progress: In the federal entities that are at the planning stage there is a political will to start implementing the reform, in that they all now have a political body composed of representatives of the three branches of the state: executive, legislature and judiciary, to coordinate the measures implementing the new criminal justice system. It is also apparent that most of these federal entities have made progress in the areas of training legal practitioners, and infrastructure and equipment. Some of them also already have an alternative justice act and/or mediation centres. 502.States at the initial stage have made the following progress: These federal entities are still in the process of negotiating on the implementing measures and have even made progress on training, but have yet to draft or reform the secondary legislation and acts complementing the Constitution and the Code of Criminal Procedure. Adopt legislative, administrative and any other needed measures to ensure that the practice of arraigo does not create situations that may result in cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment (para. 238) Compliance measures 503.Upon receipt of a request for preventive custody and after analysing the formal aspects, the judge will immediately assess the merits of the request, i.e. whether it meets the theoretical requirements of the relevant constitutional and legal provisions, namely: (a)It is requested by the Prosecution Service; (b)It relates to serious crimes and/or organized crime, and (c) It is necessary for the success of the investigation for persons or property to be protected, or there is reason to believe that the accused may evade justice. 504.To that end, the evidence submitted by the Federal Prosecution Service is studied, based on the principles of relevance and usefulness, in other words it must be appropriate to justify the measure and verify the applicant's claims. 505.Accordingly, the relevant official must provide sufficient evidence that there is indeed a danger that the suspect might evade justice and/or that there is a need for persons or property to be protected. 506.Moreover, the evidence provided must offer sufficient proof to establish with a high degree of certainty that the accused is the likely perpetrator of the crime in question. Parameters affecting evidence to order preventive custody