   by the Ombudsman’s Office in this regard. In addition, it indicated that Judge Afiuni is housed away from the rest of the prison’s inmates in an “optimal protection” area, with two guards posted specially at its door; That Ms. Afiuni confirmed to the Attorney General’s Office her wish to not be transferred to DISIP, and asked permission for three inmates to be allowed into her cell to visit her and bring her food; Regarding her right to access to her relatives and visitors, the State argued that visits to Judge Afiuni Mora from her relatives and friends are not restricted beyond what is set forth in the Oversight Regime applied to all judicial confinement and penitentiary centers existing in any country in the world. It added that Ms. Afiuni is the inmate who has received the greatest number of special visits; and That Judge Afiuni “did not move about the facility’s church, culture and sports area” because she herself “expressed her wish to remain under the PROTECTION of the maximum security area.” b) In relation to operative paragraph three, different steps have been taken to the benefit of Ms. Afiuni regarding her health. It presented a full list of these steps, referring to the medical record or log of each visit or test; rulings of the court that authorize transfers; the dates on which they were carried out; the medical treatment; responses to the treatment; and the attitude of the beneficiary,4 as well as the tests performed, if applicable; c) That it ratifies in full its brief of December 8, 2010; and d) that “the instant case is being processed before the United Nations’ International System, which violates the international principle that a case can be presented before both systems.” [sic] 9. The brief of January 5, 2011, whereby Ligia Bolivar, Maria Daniela Rivero, Carlos Ayala Corao and Jose Amalio Graterol Lafee, representatives of the beneficiary (hereinafter the “representatives”), presented their comments on the State’s report (supra Having Seen 8) and pointed out, inter alia, that: a) The State has not yet adopted the measures ordered by the Inter-American Court and its report refers to measures that were adopted prior to the President’s Order; b) Regarding the second operative paragraph:  The location where the beneficiary remains is not an area of “optimal protection,” as the State indicated, but is instead an “admission” area. Additionally, her cell is not private and she has no access to the external hallway; 4 The State described the official document dated November 8, 2010, detailing Judge Afiuni’s transfer to Hospital Padre Machado. It indicated that at the beginning of the visit, Ms. Afiuni became aware of the presence of a soldier in the doctor’s office, to which she reacted with a “rude and arrogant” attitude. Consequently, as indicated by the State’s pleading, it recommended that the Board of Conduct “not allow relatives or attorneys entry to the place where the inmate is transferred so that the work for which we are appointed will not be hindered.” 10