its internal regulations, indicating the situations in which the imposition of pretrial detention is appropriate, and provided information on the progress achieved regarding other precautionary measures that did not require deprivation of liberty, such as electronic monitoring. 290. In this case, the Court has verified that the imposition of pretrial detention in the criminal proceedings against Manuela was based on a regulation that contravened the American Convention (supra paras. 103 to 112). The Court notes that the current Salvadoran Code of Criminal Procedure regulates the use of pretrial detention in the same way. 449 Therefore, the Court considers that the State, within two years, should amend its procedural legislation in order to make it compatible with the standards for pretrial detention developed in the Court’s case law, as established in paragraphs 99 to 112 of this judgment. D.3 Awareness-raising and training for public officials 291. The Commission asked the Court to order the State to “conduct proper training of public defenders, prosecutors, judges, and other judicial officials aimed at eliminating the use of discriminatory stereotypes on the role of women, taking into account their negative impact on criminal investigations and the assessment of evidence, as well as on criminal responsibility in judicial decisions” and to “review and adjust discriminatory institutional practices in criminal investigations and within the healthcare sector.” It also asked that the State reinforce “the full effectiveness of public defense, particularly in cases involving the possible imposition of severe punishments, including disciplinary measures ensuring accountability for acts or omissions that constitute manifest negligence.” 292. The representatives asked that the State “provide training to eliminate the use of discriminatory stereotypes concerning the role of women taking into account their negative impact in criminal investigations and in the assessment of evidence and criminal responsibility in judicial decisions,” and also “permanent education and training programs for all professionals who work in health institutions, the police and the judiciary, on the appropriate treatment of obstetric emergencies, professional secrecy, pregnancy, gender, human rights, and the prevention of torture.” They asked that this training be provided: “(i) in the university careers of medicine, nursing, law, psychology and social work; (ii) to the health personnel throughout the country; (iii) to forensic physicians, and (iv) to agents of justice, including public defenders, through the corresponding judicial academy.” Similarly, they asked the Court to order the State “to reinforce the full effectiveness of public defenders, particularly in cases that involve the possible imposition of severe punishments, including disciplinary measures ensuring accountability for acts or omissions that constitute manifest negligence.” 293. The State indicated its intention of advancing towards “measures relating to the permanent education and training of public officials and employees.” It also advised that it had “developed a permanent training program to eliminate discriminatory stereotypes concerning the role of women addressed, in particular, at enhancing the knowledge, capabilities and competences of public servants, including public defenders, prosecutors, judges and other judicial officials, as well as of auxiliary organs of the administration of justice.” Thus, for example, the State was working “on the implementation of specialized technical training for the exercise of a professional defense in cases of the interruption of the gestation of the fetus”; it was developing “a specialized training program on human rights, addressed, above all, at judges and judicial agents,” and the Prosecutor General had ordered the inclusion or strengthening of components in the training program for auxiliary prosecutors on “the elimination of discriminatory stereotypes concerning the role of women and their Cf. Legislative Assembly of the Republic of El Salvador. Code of Criminal Procedure, Decree Law No. 733, articles 329 and 331. 449 80