result, the petitioners lodged an appeal for review 149/2019, which was filed before the Fourth Collegiate Court for Criminal Matters of the Second Circuit. The judges granted the amparo and the protection of the Federal Justice against the decision not to prosecute the case issued in preliminary investigation TLA/MR/III/1973/2006, and ordered several actions to be carried out. 111. On May 26, 2020, the preliminary investigation TLA/MR/III/1973/2006 was referred to the Special Prosecutor’s Office for the Investigation of Torture, in order to continue with the processing of the case and carry out the procedures ordered in the amparo ruling. 112. On July 8, 2021, an order dated July 7, 2021, was published in relation to the amparo proceeding 1760/2017, of the Second District Court of Naucalpan de Juarez, state of Mexico, which considered that the amparo ruling had been complied with without excesses or defects. In this regard, said district court considered that a decision was issued on May 3, 2021, in the preliminary investigation TLA/MR/III/1973/2006 by the public prosecutor’s agent assigned to the Office of the Special Prosecutor for the Investigation of Torture, with the approval of the Regional Prosecutor of Tlalnepantla, state of Mexico, in which it was determined not to proceed with the criminal action. b) Complaint before the Attorney General’s Office in the case of Reyes Alpízar Ortiz 113. On November 29, 2006, Reyes Alpízar filed a complaint for acts of torture before the Attorney General’s Office. 155 On January 2, 2007, the latter responded that it only investigates federal crimes and sent the brief to the PGJEM. 156 This led to a preliminary inquiry by the Office of the Special Anti-Corruption Prosecutor of the PGJEM. On March 30, 2018, the decision by the Public Prosecutor’s Office not to prosecute was notified, and was confirmed by the regional prosecutor of Tlalnepantla on April 27, 2018. 157 VIII. MERITS 114. In the instant case, the Court must analyze the scope of the State’s international responsibility for the alleged violation of various conventional rights, due to the arrest and application of the measures of arraigo and mandatory pretrial detention, and the alleged acts of torture and criminal proceedings against Daniel García Rodríguez and Reyes Alpízar Ortiz. The Court will now analyze the arguments on the merits in the following order: a) the rights to personal liberty and to the presumption of innocence in relation to the obligation to respect rights and the obligation to adopt provisions of domestic law; b) the right to personal integrity in relation to the obligation to respect rights and Articles 1, 6 and 8 of the IACPPT, and c) the rights to judicial guarantees and judicial protection in relation to the obligation to respect rights. 155 Cf. Acknowledgement of receipt of the brief denouncing acts of torture received in the Attorney General’s Office on November 29, 2006 (evidence file, folios 1496 to 1501). Cf. Official letter No. 001/07 DAQIDH of January 2, 2007, notifying Reyes Alpízar of the submission of his complaint for acts of torture to the PGJEM (evidence file, folios 2136 to 2137). 156 157 Cf. Order of March 30, 2018, notifying the decision not to prosecute in the preliminary investigation TLA/MR/III/19/3/2006, identified as Official letter No. 21317000 33, 2018 (evidence file, folio 2139). -31-