47 that “judges opt for the precautionary measure that places the heaviest burden on the right to liberty during prosecution, in order to demonstrate efficiency and avoid 158 complaints from society, the news media, and the political sector itself.” On a similar note, after meeting with judges from several different levels of the judiciary during its 2006 visit to Ecuador, the WGAD reached the conclusion that: [T]hey apparently do not enjoy the required independence to ensure the protection of detainees’ rights and to resist pressure, in particular pressure brought to bear by political parties and the media. Some even expressed fear that they would be transferred, overruled, dismissed or even subject to criminal prosecution if politicians, reporters, the police authorities or prosecutors disagreed with their 159 decisions. Also under the umbrella of the United Nations, the Report of the Latin American and Caribbean High Level Expert Group Meeting on the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners acknowledged the intense influence that public opinion has in bringing pressure to bear on judicial authorities for “imposing pre-trial detention in 160 anticipation of conviction.” Similarly, the Special Rapporteur on Torture noted how media pressure can be a factor that influences the securing of confessions by the 161 police. 110. As an example of this kind of pressure on the Judiciary from senior public officials in other branches of the government, in Mexico, the previous President had the habit of publicly criticizing the judges in certain high-profile cases. In his declarations, the President equated the action of state and federal judges of releasing people arrested by federal authorities with “impunity,” deliberately ignoring the fact that those judicial orders did not represent the final decisions in the proceedings. The head of the executive branch went as far as to say publicly: “I have nothing against judges; I respect them, but one gets tired… There is a problem there with impunity; they 158 IACHR, Press Release 64/10 – IACHR Rapporteurship Confirms Grave Detention Conditions in Buenos Aires Province, Washington, D.C., June 21, 2010, available at: http://www.cidh.oas.org/Comunicados/English/2010/64-10eng.htm. In connection with this, speaking of the pressure brought to bear on criminal judges, Argentine Supreme Court Justice Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni made the following public statement: “Today, any judge who releases a person from prison is afraid. There is a bureaucratic preference that can lead to the idea that these matters are better handed by the Chamber” (court of criminal cassation). He also underscored the risk posed by “the media and irresponsible politicians attempting to stigmatize judges.” Interview available in Spanish at: http://www.puntojus.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=2678:zaffaroni-hoy-en-diacualquier-juez-que-excarcela-a-una-persona-tiene-miedo&catid=236:seccion-justicia. 159 UN, Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, Report on Mission to Ecuador, A/HRC/4/40/Add.2, published October 26, 2006, para. 80. 160 UNODC, Report on the High Level Expert Group Meeting on the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the treatment of prisoners, held August 3 to 5, 2011, in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic, para. 14. 161 UN, Special Rapporteur on Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, Interim Report, A/64/215, published August 3, 2009, para. 41.