291. The State, requested that the Court take into account the progress made in the legal framework and institutional structure since the time of the facts and up to the present, and that it be allowed to continue improving its judicial and administrative procedures in the application of the concept of arraigo and, at the same time, continue with its internal democratic processes for the evaluation of mandatory pretrial detention. 292. The Court notes that the request for reparation submitted by the representatives and the Commission, related to a legal reform, refers both to the concept of arraigo and to the concept of mandatory pretrial detention. In this regard, the Court recalls that in Chapter VIII.1 of this judgment, it concluded that the State was responsible for the violation of the rights to personal liberty and the presumption of innocence, in relation to its obligation to adopt provisions of domestic law contained in Article 2 of the American Convention, to the detriment of Daniel García Rodríguez and Reyes Alpízar. This is because the legal concepts of arraigo and mandatory pretrial detention, regulated in Article 19 of the Mexican Constitution after it was reformed in 2008, as well as in Articles 154 and 319 of the 2000 Code of Criminal Procedure for the state of Mexico, were applied to them and were, per se, contrary to the American Convention (supra paras. 187 and 188). 293. However, as noted in the chapter on Facts (supra Chapter VII.A), the content of these norms has been reformed since the events of this case occurred. The Court will now analyze the current legal provisions and compare them with those that were in force at the time of the facts to determine whether the problems arising from the regulations that were applied in this specific case were corrected or whether they are still present, both in the reformed norms and in others that have been introduced subsequently in the legal system. a) The concept of arraigo 294. The Court confirms that the 2000 Code of Criminal Procedure for the state of Mexico no longer contains provisions on arraigo as a pre-procedural measure to restrict liberty. Nevertheless, as of 2008, the concept of arraigo as a precautionary measure of a pre-procedural nature has been incorporated into the Federal Constitution of Mexico which, in its current version, establishes in Article 16 that: The judicial authority, at the request of the Public Prosecutor’s Office and in the case of organized crime offenses, may decree the arraigo of a person, with the conditions of place and time specified by law, without exceeding forty days, provided that it is necessary for the success of the investigation, the protection of persons or legal assets, or when there is a well-founded risk that the accused will evade the action of justice. This term may be extended, provided that the Public Prosecutor’s Office proves that the causes that gave rise to it still exist. In any case, the total duration of the arraigo may not exceed eighty days. […] b) Mandatory pretrial detention 295. With regard to mandatory pretrial detention, Article 19 of the Mexican Constitution, which incorporated the concept of mandatory pretrial detention in 2008, was amended in 2019 to include more crimes in the list of offenses for which this measure should be applied. Its current wording is as follows: […]The Public Prosecutor’s Office may only request the judge to order preventive prison when other precautionary measures are not sufficient to guarantee the presence of the accused at trial, the development of the investigation, the protection of the victim, witnesses or the community, as well as when the accused is being prosecuted or has been previously sentenced for the commission of an intentional crime. The judge will order mandatory preventive detention in cases of abuse or sexual violence against minors, organized crime, intentional homicide, femicide, rape, kidnapping, human trafficking, housebreaking, use of social programs for electoral purposes, corruption involving the crimes of illicit enrichment and abusive exercise of functions, theft of cargo transportation in any of its modalities, crimes involving hydrocarbons, -74-