PRISON CONDITIONS AND THE HUMAN RIGHTS OF PERSONS DEPRIVED OF LIBERTY
175. During its visit, a delegation of the Commission visited the Chonchocorro penitentiary in the city of El Alto, the San Pedro prison and the Obrajes prison for Women, both in the city of La Paz, to verify the situation of human rights situation of persons deprived of liberty.
176. Persons held in prisons inherently cope with necessary limitations due to their deprivation of liberty. Nevertheless, they maintain the right to exercise their fundamental rights as recognized in national and international law, regardless of their legal situation or the stage of the proceedings against them, and in particular they maintain the right to humane treatment and due respect for their dignity as human beings. On the other hand, the State, as guarantor of the rights enshrined in the American Convention, is responsible for observing the right to personal integrity of all persons in its custody.
177. According to statistics from the General Direction of Prisons (hereinafter also the “DGRP”), which is part of the Ministry of Government, at the beginning of 2006 the prison population in Bolivia numbered 7,782 inmates, distributed among 54 penitentiary institutions. There were 1,193 police officers responsible for the security of these persons. The DGRP has an administrative staff of approximately 160 persons to run 54 prisons, and an annual budget of B. 58 million. In October 2006, national statistics show that the prison population totaled 7,682 inmates, in facilities with a capacity to house 4,700 prisoners.
178. In terms of domestic legislation, the national Constitution recognizes the right to liberty and stipulates conditions that must be followed for detaining persons. It also prohibits any form of torture, coercion, prison for debt or other form of physical or mental violence. Those constitutional provisions are complemented by Law 2298 of 2001, on Execution and Supervision of Sentences. Article 5 of this law provides that "in prison establishments, there shall be respect for human dignity, for constitutional guarantees, and for human rights. Any form of cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment is prohibited."
179. As regards international human rights law, Article 5 of the American Convention establishes the right of every person "to have his physical, mental and moral integrity respected." Consequently, torture and cruel, inhuman or degrading punishment or treatment are prohibited, on the basis of the fundamental principle that "all persons deprived of their liberty shall be treated with respect for the inherent dignity of the human person." This also requires that accused persons must be segregated from convicted persons, and shall be subject to separate treatment appropriate to their status as unconvicted persons.
180. In addition, when minors are subject to criminal proceedings they must be separated from adults. The American Convention also requires that minors must be treated in accordance with their special condition, bearing in mind as well Article 19 of the Convention on the duty of States to take special measures of protection required by their condition, and in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, and the United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, among other instruments.
181. All of the foregoing is consistent with the provision of the American Convention that "punishments consisting of deprivation of liberty shall have as an essential aim the reform and social readaptation of the prisoners." There are also instruments adopted under the auspices of the United Nations human rights system that relate to persons deprived of their liberty. Thus, the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, the Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners, the Body of Principles for the Protection of All Persons under any Form of Detention or Imprisonment, and the Basic Principles for the Treatment of Prisoners establish standards and rules for the treatment of persons deprived of their liberty.
182. In addition, Article 7 of the American Convention includes provisions on the circumstances in which a person may be detained and held, and stipulates that no one shall be subject to arbitrary arrest or imprisonment.
183. Based on this normative framework, the Commission has identified several priority issues of concern related to the situation of persons deprived of their liberty, in light of information made available by the State and other reliable sources, as well as from its own observations. The Commission will specifically refer to each of these aspects in the following paragraphs.
B. Use of pre-trial detention and prison overcrowding
184. Similar to most countries of the Hemisphere, Bolivia has in recent years seen significant growth in its population deprived of liberty, with the subsequent overcrowding of prisons. Nevertheless, in this country more than in others, prison overcrowding results in large part from excessive use of preventive detention, as well as from procedural delays. The prisons are in effect populated by persons awaiting trial or without a final conviction, which contradicts the exceptional nature of this measure, the purpose of which is precautionary and not punitive, in accordance with Article 7.5 of the American Convention and the right to the presumption of innocence established in Article 8.2 of the same instrument.
185. The State has recognized this problem before international human rights bodies, indicating that the gaps, contradictions and inadequacies of the then in force Code of Criminal Procedure "have led in practice to serious abuse of detention pending trial," which resulted in approximately 85% unconvicted persons in Bolivia's prisons in 1996.
186. In order to resolve the situation, the State has promoted legislative reforms to restrict the use of preventive detention and reduce prison overcrowding, for example through Law 1602 of December 15, 1994, Law 1685 of March 14, 1996, as well as Law 2098 of June 13, 2000 and Law 2133 of October 6, 2000.
187. Following the approval of Law 1685 in 1996, in particular, the number of persons in pre-trial detention in Bolivian prisons significantly decreased. In 1997, indeed, the United Nations Human Rights Committee recognized that upon approval of Law 1685, they had observed "a significant reduction in the number of persons in preventive detention".
188 Nevertheless, this trend was reversed starting from 2003, upon approval of Law 2494 of August 4, 2003, which added a new criterion for application of preventive detention related to the "risk of recidivism."
189. As a result, in October 2003, according to the General Director of Prisons, there were 5,587 prisoners (4,925 males and 662 females) in facilities with the capacity to house 4,700 persons deprived of liberty. Two years later, in October 2005, according to the same source there were 7,310 prisoners (6,361 males and 949 females). This increase from 5,587 persons (2003) to 7,310 persons (2005) deprived of liberty in Bolivian prisons possibly demonstrates the impact that Law 2494 had.
190. The Eighth Report of the Ombudsman (Defensor del Pueblo) to the National Congress – 2005, indicates that “74% of the total prison population have not been sentenced. This places Bolivia second among Latin American States in terms of unconvicted persons in the country's prisons, and highlights the limited degree to which the legal reforms on criminal law and on the justice system of the last decade have succeeded. According to the DRGP’s most recent statistics of 2006, "the penitentiary population consists for the most part of preventive detainees. The 5,080 preventive detainees account for 74% of the total."
191. The excessive use of preventive detention has a direct impact on the severe overcrowding observed in Bolivia's prisons. That factor, together with procedural delays and the inadequacies and deficiencies of the prison infrastructure, further aggravates the overcrowding of prisons in Bolivia. In particular, the delegation of the Commission observed during its on-site visit that overcrowding reached unacceptable levels in the Obrajes prison for women and in the San Pedro prison. In the latter case, especially, the inmate population exceeded in more than 400% the capacity of the 1895-built facility.
192. This situation violates Articles 83 and 84 of the Law on the Execution of Criminal Sentences, which requires that the number of persons deprived of liberty must never exceed the capacity of the prison, in order to guarantee adequate custody and treatment of inmates, and allows the Director to reject further admissions in accordance with international provisions on this matter.
193. The Commission also notes that the high levels of prison overcrowding illustrated in official data and corroborated during the on-site visits to the San Pedro prison and the Obrajes prison for women have a negative impact on the social readaptation and rehabilitation of persons deprived of liberty, and also violate their fundamental rights, in particular their rights to health, to food, to education, to work, to security, and to minimum conditions compatible with their dignity. The combination of these factors, in turn, is incompatible with the right of every person to humane treatment and respect for their inherent dignity as human beings, and contravenes the obligation of the State as guarantor, in terms of ensuring that all prisoners enjoy the minimum conditions compatible with their dignity while in State custody, in order to protect and ensure their life and personal integrity.
C. Separation of categories of persons deprived of liberty
194. As the State itself recognizes, the lack of criteria for separation and classification of the prison population "is a generalized problem in Bolivia," and has been so for at least a decade.
195. During its visit, the Commission verified the complete lack of rules for separation and classification of the prison population. The Commission noted with great concern that accused persons were imprisoned together with convicts, in violation of Article 5.4 of the American Convention; and even worse, juveniles under the age of 18 were held with adult convicts and accused persons, in violation of Article 5.5 of the Convention. As detailed below (paragraph 389) the age of criminal responsibility in Bolivia is set at 16 years, which means that juveniles between 16 and 18 years are subject to the ordinary Criminal Code, and are held in prisons for adults. While in prison, moreover, those juveniles are not given any differentiated treatment that could reflect their specific problems and needs.
196. According to the Ombudsman, 703 out of the total prison population in 2005 were adolescents or youths under the age of 21, who were being held in prisons for adults, despite the fact that Law 2298 on the Execution of Criminal Sentences requires that there be special penitentiaries for these adolescents and youths in each judicial district with a view to fostering their reintegration into society.
197. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Commission observes with concern that in practice "no judicial district has any of these centers, although the time limit of three years for establishing them expired in December . The fact that adults are held together with juveniles exposes the latter to extortion, to physical, sexual and psychological abuse, to labor exploitation, and to insecurity of all kinds." According to the 2005 Report of the Ombudsman, thanks to a cooperation agreement with the Latin American Lay Movement (MLAL), a Model Rehabilitation Center for Juveniles Deprived of Liberty was under construction in Viacha, Department of La Paz, and was scheduled for completion in 2006. During its visit, the delegation of the Commission was informed that the model center for juveniles between 16 and 21 years in Viacha would be completed and opened in 2007. The Commission hopes that this project be completed in the short-term and that the model center can be implemented in conformity with the relevant international standards.
D. Prison security and control
198. External and internal security in Bolivian prisons is under the responsibility of the National Police. According to Article 58 of the Law on the Execution of Criminal Sentences, the Director of the prison must be a member of the National Police. According to the DGRP itself, this provision "amounts to validating police authority to the detriment of civil authority", and creates
a very negative situation for the interest of inmates, who are forced to live in a permanent state of exception. Their contact with the outside world and with the authorities to whom they must turn for the most frequent questions will always be the police. Thus, the prisons are more like police stations than establishments for social readaptation. The police do not know, and have no reason to know, about these other aspects.
199. The Commission has previously adopted a position on the matter of prison control by State security forces. The Commission has held, for example, that "international standards on detention contemplate that, as a general rule, the authority responsible for the investigation of a crime and arrest should not be the authority responsible for administering detention centers. This is a safeguard against abuse, and an essential basis for prompt judicial supervision of detention centers."
200. With respect to what the Commission observed in Bolivia, it notes with concern that police personnel in the prisons do not meet the requisites established in the United Nations Standard Minimum Rules which require, for example, that "personnel shall be appointed on a full-time basis as professional prison officers." The Minimum Rules also provide that "before entering on duty, the personnel shall be given a course of training in their general and specific duties and be required to pass theoretical and practical tests," and that "after entering on duty and during their career, the personnel shall maintain and improve their knowledge and professional capacity by attending courses of in-service training to be organized at suitable intervals." In contradiction to the foregoing, the DGRP itself notes that "the administration has made no effort to see that members of the National Police responsible for penitentiary issues have specific preparation that would transmit to them a general idea that their functions within the prison have nothing to do with what they learned in their professional training in the police academy."
201. In addition to the inadequate training of police personnel responsible for the prisons, another source of concern to the Commission during its visit was the fact that, in practice, internal security in the prisons is generally in the hands of the inmates themselves. In the San Pedro prison, for example, members of the National Police seldom venture within the walls, confining themselves for the most part to external security and inspections of visitors. Within the prison, the men deprived of liberty, their wives or partners and their children are left to their own fate. The prison authorities recognized, and the delegation of the Commission confirmed, that prisoners sell or rent individual cells. This means that an inmate does not have the right to a cell, and that he has to pay to have a place to sleep; or else he will sleep in a corridor or out in the courtyard, exposed to the elements of the weather. In the Chonchocorro prison, the Commission was informed that the sports gymnasium belonged to an inmate, who charged a membership fee of B. 20 a month for its use.
202. The DGRP has prepared an analysis substantially similar to that of the Commission at the San Pedro prison:
… in many prisons, inmates have had to subdivide the cells into microcells in order to have a place to stay or sleep, and have also occupied spaces intended for use as workshops, dining facilities etc. This takeover of space has been accomplished by the prisoners themselves, without any assistance or even consent by the State, which has confined itself to noting that the space ceased to be government property and fell into the hands of private owners who had contributed to transforming the prisons. The prisons are usually divided into sections in response to economic criteria, and not the classification criteria established by Law 2298.
When a person deprived of liberty arrives at the prison, he is received at the front door by the Reception Committee, consisting of volunteer inmates from the different sections, and they protect the newcomer from abuse by other prisoners, and advise him of the rules he must respect within the prison, and the rights he will enjoy. The committee works with the newcomer to find him lodging.
Access to space in the prison, however, is not free (contrary to Article 22 of the law), but rather a privilege, and it is governed by the laws of the market. To secure a cell for sharing, in a safe area that is more or less occupied, will depend on the new inmate's economic capacity.
203. With regard to this concerning information, the Commission deems it relevant to remind the Bolivian State that as it has been declared by the Inter-American Court, the State responsibility to adopt security measures to protect the people under its jurisdiction is more evident in the case of people confined in a detention center, in which case the State is the guarantor of the rights of persons under its custody. In that sense and in keeping with the final recommendations, the Commission urges the State to adopt all the necessary measures to regain control over the internal area of the detention centers – in strict observance of human rights – in order to fulfill its international obligations.
E. Prison infrastructure and rehabilitation programs
204. According to information supplied to the Commission from various governmental and nongovernmental sources, including the Ombudsman and the DGRP, the conditions in many Bolivian prisons amount to cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment. The Ombudsman, in his Eighth Report to the National Congress of 2005, pointed out for example that "in successive inspections, we have observed deplorable conditions in the country’s provincial prisons. These findings, together with others by the General Direction of Prisons, led to the closing of 30 such establishments that did not meet the minimal conditions for detention."
205. Specifically with regard to the so-called “small jails” (carceletas), the Ombudsman examined the situation of jails in La Paz, and subsequently expanded the study in 2004 and 2005 to provinces in the other departments of the country, and verified "the grave conditions in which persons deprived of liberty live in those facilities."
206. In a meeting with the Commission during its visit, the General Director of Prisons described the prisons as "human dumpsters," because of the poor condition of infrastructure and the neglect to which they have been subjected over the years. The precariousness of the facilities and budgetary shortages are also reflected in unacceptable conditions of health, hygiene and food in Bolivian prisons. At the San Pedro prison, for example, there is one doctor to care for more than 1,500 men deprived of liberty, and in the infirmary there are no medications, and only 10 beds. The DGRP recognizes that “in most Bolivian prisons, the right to health is violated because rarely there are health services, and where they exist, they do not meet even the minimum health care standards.” The delegation of the Commission also confirmed that, in the San Pedro prison, food is not properly prepared, which might lead in many cases to epidemics and gastrointestinal infections, and that food is also insufficient, obliging many prisoners to pay for their own food, if they have the money to do so.
207. The Commission hopes that the political will expressed by the General Director of Prisons during the meeting with the delegation of the Commission results in concrete actions with a view to improving living conditions and the respect for the rights of persons deprived of liberty in Bolivia.
208. During its visits to the Chonchocorro Penitentiary, the San Pedro Prison, and the Obrajes prison for women, the Commission heard complaints from inmates dissatisfied due to the lack of State support for programs of study, work and training designed to rehabilitate persons deprived of liberty and prepare them to reinsertion into society after they have served their sentence. The delegation of the Commission also found that, because of overcrowding, there is no space, equipment or means provided by the State for the rare programs that help persons deprived of liberty occupy their time usefully. In the few workshops observed, persons deprived of liberty and State officials alike confirmed that the former had to buy their own materials without any help from the State.
209. On this point, the Commission emphasizes that reform and social readaptation are the essential purposes of punishments consisting of deprivation of liberty, according to Article 5.6 of the American Convention, thus those objectives must guide prison management. In addition, the rehabilitation and resocialization of those who have committed crimes is a guarantee of public security, and the State must consequently promote the conditions necessary to achieve these goals.
F. Family cohabitation
210. Article 26 of the Law on the Execution of Criminal Sentences provides that inmates' children under the age of six may remain in the prison if the parent who has custody of the child is deprived of liberty. The law also allows the presence of spouses or partners. The delegation of the Commission observed the presence of children of persons deprived of liberty in the San Pedro prison and in the Obrajes prison for women.
211. The State itself has recognized the special vulnerability of inmates' children, given the conditions of detention that prevail in most of the country's penitentiaries. In the Third Periodic Report presented by Bolivia to the United Nations Committee on Rights of the Child, the State recognized that children institutionalized with their parents frequently find themselves “in conditions that are not the most suitable for their development.” The State also indicated that "the problem of children living with their mother or father in prisons has been denounced by the Ombudsman and by the press. The efforts made have been few and the achievements insignificant."
212. During its visit, the delegation of the Commission verified that children up to 16 years of age, of both sexes, were living in prisons with convicted and accused adult males. The Commission notes that family cohabitation in prisons could be a positive alternative from the viewpoint of rehabilitation and social readaptation of persons deprived of liberty, but only under circumstances and conditions of strict respect for human rights.
213. Consequently, given the precarious conditions of infrastructure, hygiene and safety indicated above, and the lack of internal control and security by the State, the Commission expresses its concern over the physical, mental and moral integrity of the children living with their parents in the prisons visited. In the San Pedro prison, for example, the delegation of the Commission heard reports from social workers and physicians about cases of violence and mistreatment of children, including sexual abuse and risk thereof in that prison, while no measures of any kind had been taken to address those problems.
214. The prison situation observed in Bolivia and the resulting problems are complex, and call for official responses developed through dialogue and coordination among the three branches of government, some of which should be implemented immediately while others could be carried out in the medium and long term. The Commission therefore urges the executive, judicial and legislative branches of Bolivia to encourage interagency dialogue and debate with a view to remedying the situation of human rights of persons deprived of liberty, taking a comprehensive view and applying solutions that carry the agreement of all sectors involved.
215. On the basis of the analysis and the priority issues identified above with respect to the Bolivian prison system, the Commission recommends that the State:
1. Ensure that the judicial authorities apply preventive detention reasonably and in conformity with the aforementioned international standards, and that all the accused have at their disposal access to a judicial remedy to question excessive time in preventive detention.
2. Take the necessary judicial, legislative and other measures to correct the excessive application of preventive detention and the procedural delays that persist in the administration of justice. Among other measures that the State may deem pertinent, these shall include the release of all detainees who have not been sentenced within a reasonable time without prejudice to the continuation of the proceedings against them.
3. Take judicial, legislative and other measures with a view to reducing overcrowding and improving living conditions in Bolivian prisons, while ensuring that prisoners are treated with the respect due to the inherent dignity of human beings.
4. Establish effective systems to ensure that accused persons are segregated from those who have been convicted, and create mechanisms for classifying persons deprived of liberty according to sex, age, reason for detention, special needs, and applicable treatment.
5. Put an immediate halt to the practice of keeping minors under the age of 18 years, accused or convicted, in prison together with accused or convicted adults, even temporarily.
6. Adopt the necessary measures to immediately regain control of internal areas of prisons in the country, and monitor – also through serious investigations – cases of corruption observed. Also, establish special recruitment and training programs for all personnel in charge of the administration, supervision, operation and security of prisons and other places of deprivation of liberty, which must include education on international human rights standards related to prison security, the proportionate use of force, and the humane treatment of persons deprived of liberty.
7. Adopt measures with a view to improving infrastructure in those prisons where conditions are precarious and do not meet the minimum requirements with respect to drinking water, sanitary facilities, personal hygiene, floor space, light and ventilation; sufficient and adequate food; and adequate bedding.
8. Take the necessary steps to ensure that persons deprived of liberty have access to adequate medical attention, which requires the presence of a medical team sufficient in relation to the number of inmates, with the capacity to respond to medical emergencies, and the availability of medications; in particular, for immediate attention to the elderly, the sick and children living in prisons.
9. Take steps to provide and facilitate educational and working opportunities for persons deprived of liberty with a view to assisting in their reform, social readaptation, and personal rehabilitation.
10. Take the necessary measures to ensure that when children are lodged in detention centers together with their father or mother deprived of liberty, the best interest of the child is taken into account upon establishing pertinent policies, and particularly that they have access to special protection, food, health and educational services necessary for their proper development. Also, take measures to guarantee, in the same terms, the best interest of children not living in prison with the parent deprived of liberty who has custody of the child. In this context, the State shall carry out serious and diligent investigations whenever there is a complaint of sexual abuse to the detriment of persons that live in prisons.
11. Guarantee detention conditions to be controlled effectively by criminal execution judges in the case of those condemned detainees, and by criminal judges in the case of persons under preventive detention.
12. Dispose adequate and effective remedies of individual and collective nature for judicial control of overcrowding and violence conditions inside penitentiaries. Those remedies must be accessible to persons deprived of liberty, their relatives, their private or public defenders, NGOs, the Ombudsman and other competent institutions.
 See, inter alia, I/A Court H.R., Case of Miguel Castro Castro. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, para. 273; I/A Court H. R., Case of Ximenes Lopes. Judgment of July 4, 2006. Series C No. 149, para. 138; I/A Court H. R., Case of Baldeón García. Judgment of April 6, 2006. Series C No. 147, para. 120; and I/A Court H. R., Case of López Álvarez. Judgment of February 1, 2006. Series C No. 141, paras. 104-106.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, p. 22.
 Ibid., p. 22.
 IACHR interview with the General Director of Prisons, Mr. Ramiro Llanos, on November 12, 2006.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, National Prison Population Statistics (October 2006).
 See Articles 9 to 11 of the Constitution.
 See Article 12 of the Constitution.
 Adopted by the General Assembly in Resolution 40/33 of November 28, 1985, A/RES/40/33 (hereinafter "the Beijing Rules").
 Adopted by the General Assembly in Resolution 45/113 of December 14, 1990, A/RES/45/113 (hereinafter "Rules for Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty").
 On this point, see I/A Court H.R., Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child. Advisory Opinion OC-17/02 of August 28, 2002. Series A No. 17, para. 194.
 Adopted by the First United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, held at Geneva in 1955, and approved by the Economic and Social Council by its resolution 663C (XXIV) of July 31, 1957, and 2076 (LXII) of May 13, 1977 (hereinafter "Minimum Rules").
 Adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in Resolution 43/173 of December 9, 1988, A/RES/43/173 (hereinafter "Body of Principles").
 Adopted and proclaimed by the General Assembly in Resolution 45/111 of December 14, 1999, A/RES/45/111 (hereinafter "Basic Principles").
 See I/A Court H. R., Case of López Álvarez. Judgment of February 1, 2006. Series C No. 141, para. 67; I/A Court H. R., Case of García Asto and Ramírez Rojas. Judgment of November 25, 2005. Series C No. 137, para. 106; I/A Court H. R., Case of Palamara Iribarne. Judgment of November 22, 2005. Series C No. 135, para. 197; I/A Court H. R., Case of Acosta Calderón. Judgment of June 24, 2005. Series C No. 129, para. 74; and I/A Court H. R., Case of Tibi. Judgment of September 7, 2004. Series C No. 114, para. 106.
 See I/A Court H. R., Case of López Álvarez. Judgment of February 1, 2006. Series C No. 141, para. 67; I/A Court H. R., Case of García Asto and Ramírez Rojas. Judgment of November 25, 2005. Series C No. 137, para. 106; I/A Court H. R., Case of Acosta Calderón. Judgment of June 24, 2005. Series C No. 129, para. 75; I/A Court H. R., Case of Tibi. Judgment of September 7, 2004. Series C No. 114, para. 180; and I/A Court H.R., Suárez Rosero Case. Judgment of November 12, 1997. Series C No. 35, para. 77.
 Second periodic report submitted by Bolivia on implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Doc CCPR/C/63/Add.4 1996, para. 48.
 Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Bolivia, UN Doc CCPR/CE/79/Add.74, para. 12.
 See Articles 15 and 16 of the National Citizen Security Law, amending Articles 234, 235, 240, 247 and 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, expanding the grounds for application of precautionary measures such as preventive detention.
 Eighth Report of the Ombudsman to Congress – 2005, p. 166. See also: Permanent Assembly of Human Rights of Bolivia (APDHB). Analysis of the Human Rights Situation in Bolivia in 2005, pp. 5 and 15; U.S. Department of State. Country Reports on Human Rights Practices – 2005 – Bolivia, p. 4; and Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Human Rights in Bolivia, 2003, p. 7 (citing data from Amnesty International and the Ombudsman’s office in 2003, that approximately 80% of Bolivian prison inmates have not been convicted).
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, p. 22.
 According to the Director General of Penitentiaries, Mr. Ramiro Llanos, the degree of overcrowding at San Pedro is approximately 500%. According to the national statistics on the prison population, in October 2006 there were 1,564 men held in the San Pedro prison; to this number must be added approximately 40 wives and 250 children living in the prison with them, for a total population of approximately 1,854 people in the prison. According to the interview with the "Governor" of the San Pedro prison, Col. Manuel Guzman, the facility has the capacity to hold 350 prisoners.
 See Minimum Rules, Rules 9.1-14.
 Concluding Observations of the Human Rights Committee: Argentina, November 3, 2000 U.N. Doc. CCPR/CO/70/ARG, para. 11; and C.P.T., Report to the United Kingdom Government on the visit to the United Kingdom carried out by the European Committee for the Prevention of Torture and Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, November 26, 1991, CPT/Inf (91) 15, para. 229.
 See Inter-American Court. Prisoners in the “Dr. Sebastião Martins Silveira” penitentiary in Araraquara, São Paulo, vs. Brazil. Resolution of September 30, 2006, considerandum 11; Inter-American Court. Penitentiaries of Mendoza. Resolution of March 30, 2006, considerandum 7; and Inter-American Court. Instituto de Reeducación del Menor. Judgment of September 2, 2004, Series C No. 112, para. 159.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, p. 37.
 On this point, see Second periodic report submitted by Bolivia on implementation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, UN Doc CCPR/C/63/Add.4 1996, paras. 54, 56 and 88, in which the committee noted that “[o]wing to the unsuitable and defective prison infrastructure, the inmates of all Bolivia's prisons share the same quarters without any separation … Persons accused of crimes are not kept separate from convicted prisoners,” and observed "the housing of minors in prisons on a permanent basis." Five years later, in 2001, the Committee against Torture, in analyzing the initial report submitted by Bolivia on implementation of the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment, observed among its principal grounds for concern "[i]nformation it has received regarding the inhuman conditions under which prisoners are held in the facilities known as carceletas … where juvenile and adult detainees are held together, as are prisoners awaiting trial and those already serving sentences." (Concluding Observations of the Committee against Torture: Bolivia, UN doc. A/56/44. para 95(5)).
 See also the Minimum Rules, Rule 8; and the Body of Principles, Principle 8.
 See Rules for Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, Rule 29.
 See Beijing Rules, Rule 2.3.
 See Rules for Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, Rule 12.
 Report VIII of the Ombudsman to the National Congress, 2005, p. 170.
 Ibid., p. 170.
 Ibid., p. 170.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, p. 41.
 See for example, IACHR, Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, April 6, 2001, Chapter VIII, paras. 23 and 24; and IACHR, Report on the Situation of Human Rights in the Dominican Republic, October 7, 1999, paras. 252-255.
 IACHR, Fifth Report on the Situation of Human Rights in Guatemala, op. cit., para. 14
 Minimum Rules, Rule 46.3.
 Ibid., Rules, Rule 47.2.
 Ibid., Rule 47.3.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, pp. 41-42. Nevertheless, during the Commission’s on-site visit, the General Director of Prisons, Mr. Ramiro Llanos, declared his willingness to enhance the role of civilians in place of members of the National Police in the new penitentiaries that are to be inaugurated in 2007.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, pp. 44-45.
 See Inter-American Court. Children and Adolescents Deprived of Liberty in the “Complexo do Tatuapé” of FEBEM. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of July 4, 2006, considerandum 8; and Inter-American Court. “Urso Branco” Prison. Provisional Measures. Judgment of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights of September 21, 2005, considerandum 6.
 Eighth Report of the Ombudsman to Congress – 2005, p. 29.
 Ibid., p. 166.
 See also: Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, p. 13.
 See Minimum Rules, Rules 22-26.
 Ministry of Government – General Direction of Prisons, Situation of Bolivia’s Prisons, p. 45.
 See Minimum Rules, Rules 20.1 and 20.2.
 Ibid., Rules 71.1-78.
 Ibid., Rules 58 and 59.
 Third periodic report presented by Bolivia on implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, UN doc. CRC/C/125/Add. 2, para. 38.
 Ibid., para. 39. In its concluding observations on the Third Report of Bolivia, of February 11, 2005, the Committee on the Rights of the Child reiterated "its concern about the situation of children living in prisons with one of their parents and about the living conditions of these children and the regulation of their care if they are separated from their parent in prison". (Concluding Observations of the Committee on the Rights of the Child: Bolivia, UN doc. CRC/C/15/Add.256, para. 39).