increase in medical and nursing staff, and the creation of health clinics in the different prisons,” and that 1,795 persons deprived of liberty were enrolled in different educational programs.” It indicated the existence of a new prison in Juticalpa and, at the hearing, referred to the acquisition of a piece of land for the construction of a prison. 9. In its report of July 1, 2008, the State indicated, inter alia, that “the topic of human rights [had been added] to the curriculum that candidates for prison police must follow.” Subsequently, during the hearing, it indicated that it “now had an assessment of the needs for human rights training in the national prison system,” and that “the Justice and Human Rights Secretariat […] had implemented several training programs on human rights; in […] particular, […] for officials who work in prisons.” With regard to the foregoing, including the information provided on infrastructure and safety, it indicated that it would send the Court “a detailed report.” 10. At the hearing, the representatives expressed their appreciation of the enactment of legislation, but indicated that it was insufficient, because it had not resulted in an improvement in the conditions of persons deprived of liberty. On that occasion, as well as in their written observations, they indicated that the budget was insufficient to improve the living conditions of the persons deprived of liberty, which were deplorable, because the prisons had inadequate lighting, safety was inexistent, some of those deprived of liberty slept on the floor and in places corresponding to sanitary facilities, and food was of a dubious quality and variety. They also referred to prison overcrowding, lack of sufficient health care, and absence of adequate information on access to education for persons deprived of liberty. They stressed that, over recent months and years, there had been numerous attempted uprisings in different prisons that, among other consequences, had resulted in deaths and injuries, and that were the result of deficient detention conditions and food, among other reasons. They stated that the fact that detention conditions in the prisons were inhuman had led to the occurrence of tragic incidents that must not be repeated. 11. Furthermore, regarding the human rights training for prison officials, on August 1, 2008, the representatives indicated that the State had failed to describe the content of the human rights course, or when it was implemented and, during the hearing, they indicated that the State must provide sufficient information on the specific training activities that it was implementing and the results. Even though they had the information mentioned by the Attorney General that an assessment had been made of the human rights training needs, they had not had access to the results. Therefore, during the hearing, the representatives considered it pertinent that the Court “ask the State […] to present a detailed report with exhaustive, verified and substantiated” information. 12. In its written observations (supra having seen paragraph 5), the Commission indicated that the State had not “presented information proving that budget increase has been reflected in an improvement in the prisoners’ food,” and that it had insufficient information with regard to the construction of new prisons, and about the medical attention and infrastructure in the existing ones, or about the education of persons deprived of liberty. During the hearing, it stated that, based on a visit that the Commission had made to Honduras, the Commission’s Rapporteur on the Rights of Persons Deprived of Liberty had noted the “persistence of the structural crisis,” including the situation of overcrowding, as well as problems relating to sanitation and infrastructure. 13. Regarding the training of officials, the Commission indicated in its written observations that the State had not provided sufficient information and, at the hearing, it indicated that, during the above-mentioned visit (supra considering paragraph 12), it had 4