CAT/C/39/2 page 43 difficulties in the implementation of the Torture Law. The Committee members found it regrettable that the procedure established by the Constitutional amendment 45/2004, whereby the Superior Court of Justice is competent, upon request of the Federal Prosecutor General, to transfer a case concerning serious violations of human rights (including torture) from the local courts to the federal courts has rarely been used. 183. There seems to be very strong pressure and demand from society and politicians that all criminals should receive strict penalties and remain in detention centres away from the public. Judges allegedly impose harsher sentences than are necessary, and do not apply alternative sentences,38 such as payment of reparation, community work or temporary suspension of rights provided by the Penal Code. The application of such sentences would relieve, to a certain extent, the overcrowding which exists in detention centres. 184. The Committee members were concerned at comments made by high-level Government officials; these included the opinion that juvenile second-time offenders should not be protected under the Statute of the Child and Adolescent and that police officers who commit a crime of torture should not be treated in the same way as civilians who commit such a crime, because the former can be integrated into society more easily, given that they are trained. 185. The Committee members observed that the protection of detainees during their arrest, pre-trial detention and detention is well provided for in the national legislation. However, serious difficulties arise in the implementation of the law. They also considered that the legal provisions in this area are generally not well known. This observation was confirmed when the President of the Supreme Court of Rio de Janeiro affirmed to the Committee members that the crime of torture constituted a federal crime. Due to his lack of knowledge of criminal law in this regard, the President felt uncomfortable with the discussion and abruptly interrupted the dialogue with the Committee members. 186. The Committee members also noted that, in practice, a large number of detainees with whom the Committee members met did not have any free legal assistance, despite the fact that they did not have the funds to pay a lawyer. The Public Defender’s Office is not available in a large part of the country and reportedly, in those cases where it is present, lacks resources to carry out its functions. For instance, the State of São Paulo still does not have a Public Defender’s Office. At the time of the visit, the Public Defender’s Office in Rio de Janeiro was on strike for various reasons, including lack of personnel, precarious work conditions and low salaries (public defenders reportedly earn one third of a judge or prosecutor’s salary). 38 The possibility of applying alternative sentences is provided for in articles 43 and 44 of the Penal Code. Alternative sentences substitute sentences of deprivation of liberty in the following cases: the sentence of deprivation of liberty should not be more than four years; the crime was not committed with violence or serious threats of violence and was unintentional; the offender has not previously committed an intentional crime; and his/her previous record, social conduct, personality and circumstances of the commission of the crime indicate that an alternative sentence is sufficient.