15 with the Ministry of the Interior and the Ombudsman’s Office – Bureau of Truth, Justice and Reparation[-], by which the latter undertakes to collaborate with the incorporation of a program of recent historical memory in the syllabus of the police formation, to make a special study of the Judgment”. In addition, the State pointed out that the Human Rights Area of the Ministry of the Interior initiated “a process of curricular review with the different Police Formation Schools” to strengthen the human rights training programs. Finally, the State exemplified its institutional commitment to promote the human rights perspective, by furnishing the "Protocol of procedures for evictions of great importance" recently adopted, which stipulates a series of guidelines for the performance of police activities, including the coordination of human rights and child protection aspects. As a consequence of the information provided, the State considered that this operative paragraph should be declared to be fulfilled. 47. That the representatives considered that “[t]here is a small program, but that it is very basic, [therefore] practically no progress has been made regarding this aspect”. 48. That the Commission, moreover, valued the information presented by the State during the hearing and considered it was necessary to assess the documents furnished in order to make a decision accordingly. 49. That the Court positively values the progress mentioned by the State at the hearing. Moreover, without detriment to emphasize that it is important to include, in the human rights training programs, some material referred to the content of the Judgment delivered in the instant case, the Tribunal considers that the State complied with this measure of reparation as to the design and implementation of human rights training programs, in the understanding that these programs are permanent. In turn, the Court deems it is pertinent to recall that the efficacy of the design and implementation of the human rights training programs within the security forces is vital to provide guarantees of non-repetition of facts such as the ones of the instant case. That is to say, such programs must show the results of action and prevention to prove their efficacy, beyond the fact they may be evaluated using the appropriate indicators, since their results should not be but the effective elimination of practices in violation of human rights. * * * Adaptation of the offenses of torture and forced disappearance of persons 50. That, as tot he obligation of the State to adapt the definition of the crimes of torture and “involuntary” (forzosa) disappearance of persons contained in Articles 236 and 309 of the current Penal Code to the applicable provisions of international human rights law (operative paragraph twelve of the Judgment), the State pointed out that on May 20, 2009, a new bill was presented to the Congress to make such reform, which would be “subjected to the Commission’s opinion” ; therefore, during the hearing, it requested the parties to make their observations in order to include them in the bill. 51. That even though the representatives pointed out that, up to the present, the adaptation of the rules has not been made, they confirmed the information furnished by the State as to the existence of said bill. 52. That the Commission noted, as informed by the State in its first report on compliance, that in 2007, a bill was submitted to the Congress, of which there is no further information; and in light of the new bill, it was communicated that it would evaluate the