The president of Ecuador's Judiciary Council, Gustavo Jalkh, is flatly rejecting accusations made by the controversial nongovernmental organization Human Rights Watch, accusing it of lacking an understanding of the country's judicial system.

"The report is technically very bad, it leaves much to be desired. It commits legal confusion in many regards," said Jalkh during a press conference Wednesday.

The report by Human Rights Watch is tinged with politicized conclusions and accuses the Ecuadorean justice system of deliberately delaying appeals in cases involving anti-government protestors as a result of political pressure.

RELATED: Compare and Contrast: Human Rights Watch on Mexico and Ecuador

Human Rights Watch bases this conclusion on interviews with the convicted offenders, their families, their lawyers and jurists. Questioning the integrity of the Ecuadorean justice system, the report also labels the convictions as “unjust” without providing an objective explanation as to why.

"Human Rights Watch's claim that judges are not quickly applying the principle of leniency is false,” said Jalkh.

Ecuador approved a new criminal code last year, which came into force in August 2014. The new criminal codes mandates prosecutors and courts apply the less severe punishment in cases where there exists different punishments under the old and new criminal codes.

Human Rights Watch takes issue specifically with convictions involving protestors who were found guilty of “terrorism” and “sabotage.” Under the new criminal code these offenses were more narrowly defined and the punishments modified.

The nongovernmental organization contends that the provisions of the new criminal code should automatically be applied retroactively. However, Jalkh said that the rules of the justice system specify that it should only be applied when someone requests it.

Jalkh said that there had been 2,792 applications for this procedure and of those 2,237 were freed, while 538 were denied and a further 17 are pending.

Human Rights Watch's Americas director, Jose Miguel Vivanco, accuses the government of using legislation against critics, while also questioning the integrity of the justice system, saying that the convictions were “groundless,” but failing to substantiate the claim.

The report then lists a series of cases documented by Human Rights Watch, two of which were connected to offenses committed during a 2010 coup attempt against the democratically-elected government of Rafael Correa.

The report only refers to the events of Sept. 30, 2010, as a police mutiny, despite the fact that it was revealed that the events were in fact a pre-planned coup attempt.

The other cases involve convictions relating to the planning or execution of violent protests. The report claims that in the case of the Luluncoto 10 the state had insufficient evidence, but cites a defense attorney as the source for this claim.

A fourth case profiled by Human Rights Watch details the case of Pepe Acacho, who was convicted of terrorism for inciting violent protests that left many injured and one dead.

The timing of the release of the Human Rights Watch report coincides with a recent spate of often-violent protests in the country by right-wing opposition forces. Many protestors openly called for the ousting of the democratically-elected government and some attacked police in an effort to break their lines in order to storm the presidential palace in the capital of Quito. Police showed a lot of restraint in the face of these attacks that left several officers injured.

RELATED: In Depth – Right-Wing Attack on Ecuador's Democracy

President Correa has defended the right of people to peacefully demonstrate, but warned that the state would not tolerate these attacks against security forces in any future protests and those attacking police would be arrested and charged.

Correa has also invited opposition groups and politicians to participate in dialogue about the need to address inequality in the country. However many have rejected the invitation, with one opposition group instead opting to call for an uprising against the government. That group has refused to rule out violent tactics, including the blockading of roads in order to prevent the arrival of food to the cities.