E/CN.4/2000/9/Add.1 page 14 64. In its letter of 14 July 1998, the Government transmitted to the Special Rapporteur documents listing the papers on the question of torture in Mexico presented at a forum organized by the Human Rights Commission of the Federal District. 65. The first of these papers, entitled “La Fatalidad Derrotada” by Doctor Luis de la Barrera, highlights the progress made since the constitutional reform of 1993 and the recent Federal Law on the prevention and punishment of torture which does away with the probative value of a confession made to the police. This legal reform, together with the creation of the Office of Ombudsman, had put an end to the complete impunity enjoyed by persons responsible for such offences. The author recognized that “much still remained to be done” and in particular drew attention to the prolonged nature of preliminary investigations into allegations of torture. Lastly, he defended the work being done by public human rights protection bodies in connection with torture and other human rights violations in view of their exemplary efficiency as opposed to those who were in favour of the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal judiciary. 66. The second of these papers, entitled “Una acción renovada contra la tortura”, by Patricia Marín Fagoga and submitted on behalf of the NGO Action of Christians for the Abolition of Torture (ACAT) recognizes the major - albeit still inadequate - efforts made in Mexico City to combat torture. In particular, it is noted that, although torture was not practised systematically in Mexico and that citizens were gradually becoming aware of their right to physical and psychological integrity, denial of justice and the absence of compensation were still the rule. In that connection, ACAT drew attention to various factors that made it difficult to eradicate torture, highlighting the following: the close working and institutional relationship prevailing in the offices of the public prosecutor and police associations together with the fact that the Public Prosecutor’s Office characterizes acts of torture as minor offences, on a level with the abuse of authority or assault and battery; the fear of the victims to lodge complaints; the fact that the physician assigned to the Public Prosecutor’s Office fails to certify injuries immediately and properly; the lack of staff and resources required to identify cases of psychological torture; the fact that, in a large number of cases, the detainee is not informed of his rights so that in practice the officially appointed lawyer is not present and is simply required to sign various documents at the time the statement is finalized. Lastly, because the victim lacks confidence, he tends to complain to various public human rights bodies and not to the Public Prosecutor’s Office, despite the fact that the investigations carried out by such bodies are not taken into account, except in an incidental manner, by the Public Prosecutor’s Office when it conducts its own preliminary investigations. 67. In view of the above, ACAT-Mexico proposed that the Public Prosecutor’s Office should do everything possible to protect the physical and psychological integrity of the complainant and his relatives - for example by installing a call-tracing device or by making a thorough investigation of allegations of threats or torture. It also proposed that, until such time as problems connected with the administration of justice are solved, a legal department independent of the executive should be established to conduct and coordinate preliminary investigations and be provided with adequate staff and financial resources. Thirdly, the investigation of cases should be speeded up, legal time-limits laid down for the completion of preliminary investigations and sanctions provided for if the deadlines are not complied with. Furthermore, an independent system should be created for the inspection of all places of detention by members of human rights NGOs headed by State committees and the National Human Rights