submit claims of ill-treatment and resolve the criminal proceedings in which they are involved. The Subcommittee welcomes the strengthening of the public defence system envisaged as part of the constitutional reform of the criminal justice system (art. 17). However, the Subcommittee recommends that steps be taken to accelerate those processes so that the situation of defencelessness in which the most vulnerable accused persons find themselves can be remedied as quickly as possible. 75.Members of the delegation noted that in Oaxaca, for example, the Office of the Public Defender lacks independence and budgetary autonomy, and there is an insufficient number of indigenous defenders or experts in indigenous law to adequately represent the interests of indigenous persons arrested for crimes or provide an adequate defence. 76.In Oaxaca, the Office of the Public Defender, although it comes under the Ministry of Indigenous Affairs, is not staffed by a sufficient number of indigenous defenders or experts in indigenous law to adequately represent the interests of indigenous people deprived of their liberty or mount defences such as “culturally conditioned error”, provide culturally appropriate expert testimony or put forward arguments rooted in indigenous law (customs and practices). The shortage of public defenders who speak the same language as their clients, coupled with the failure to use interpreters, creates an imminent risk that many indigenous people not only will not know their rights or the reason for their detention, but also that they will be subjected to physical or mental abuse. Moreover, the ethnic and cultural identity of these people, which is an integral part of their lives, may be seriously harmed. The delegation had the opportunity to meet indigenous people who were detained and observed first-hand the seriousness of the situation that most of them face. 77.The grave situation of indigenous people is compounded when they are convicted without having had an adequate legal defence and are put in prisons where they find themselves in an even more vulnerable situation. Delegation members noted that many indigenous people who were serving sentences had first learned to speak Spanish after arriving at the prison, often abandoning their native languages. Several of the indigenous people interviewed stated that they had never known the reasons for their arrest and had not been able to communicate with anyone who could explain why they had been arrested. Others told members of the delegation that at the time of their arrest they had been forced to sign a document that they could not understand, in which they had admitted to committing an offence that they had not, in fact, committed. They also said that they had not had an opportunity to discuss any aspect of their arrest with a lawyer because they were unable to communicate in the same language. 78.Members of the delegation noted an obvious disparity in the allocation of human and material resources between public prosecutors and public defenders. They also noted that interviews were conducted with detainees without the necessary confidentiality and court hearings and without having a judge present. Hearings were conducted with the detainee behind bars and with police personnel nearby. As an example of the clear imbalances in infrastructure between public prosecutors and public defenders, seven courts had three clerks apiece to serve them but only six public defenders, who had no support staff or computers. In contrast, the delegation noted that 14 public prosecutors had the support of seven clerks and computers. 79. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party examine its public defence system and eliminate the constraints hindering the work of public defenders so that persons deprived of their liberty have a real opportunity to consult a public defender from the moment they are arrested and to exercise their right to defence and thus prevent or bring to light any instances of torture or ill-treatment. The Subcommittee recommends that the State party improve the quantity and quality of the services provided by public defenders and, in particular, that it ensure that they are able to function in a framework of independence and institutional autonomy. The Subcommittee further recommends that public defence databases be developed in order to keep records of instances of torture or other inhuman treatment reported or mentioned in confidence to public defenders by their clients. 80.The Subcommittee believes that one of the best ways to prevent torture and cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment of potential victims is through the existence of a free public defence service staffed by qualified defenders who work on an equal footing with the judges and officials of the Public Prosecutor’s Office. In Oaxaca, there is legislation creating such a service, but the delegation found that it is not being applied in practice. Not enough has been done to achieve pay parity between public defenders and public prosecutors. The State should establish a balance between the services offered by public prosecution services to victims of crime and the defence services available to persons who may be victims of torture and cruel treatment. 81.The Subcommittee is pleased to note that there are plans to strengthen the public defence system in the context of criminal justice reform. The Subcommittee believes that, in order to ensure that this change actually occurs and the initiative does not remain on paper only, the various states should expedite and accelerate the process of institutional strengthening, taking urgent action to eliminate the current disparities with respect to the public prosecution services as those disparities work to the detriment of detained persons, who have the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty at trial. 82. Steps should be taken to ensure that an adequate number of public defenders are available 24 hours a day to respond in an effective, independent and timely manner and to provide legal assistance for people who require it from the moment they come under the custody or control of the Public Prosecutor ’ s Office. C.Office of the Attorney-General and implementation of the Istanbul Protocol 83.The Subcommittee welcomes the Mexican authorities’ implementation of the Istanbul Protocol as part of their efforts to stem impunity. However, in relation to the use of this instrument, and in particular the implications of its mode of application, the Subcommittee wishes to remind the State party that the Istanbul Protocol is intended not just to document cases of torture but also to prevent them. The delegation observed during its visit that most of the Mexican states are in the process of implementing the Istanbul Protocol. However, in most states visited there is little experience or information with respect to this mechanism. 84.During its meetings held with Mexican authorities, the Subcommittee delegation was informed about the efforts being made and the progress in implementing the Istanbul Protocol, with the encouragement and leadership of the Attorney-General’s Office.