Democratization adopted. In many cases, however, the structures or procedures needed to produce effective legislation do not evolve in a commensurate manner. Obstacles to good law-making emerge when a new issue is being dealt with for the first time and when expertise is not readily available. In other cases, expertise is available, but the failure to plan adequately results in a hasty process that fails to include civil society. Upon request, ODIHR lends assistance to states to make up part of this capacity gap. This primarily consists of providing legal expertise to assess compliance with relevant standards, making recommendations to improve draft legislation, and sharing good practices that may help law drafters explore options other than those originally considered. In terms of sharing good practices, ODIHR’s legislative database (www.legislationline.org) is a widely used tool for all those involved in legislative reform. When providing assistance on specific laws, ODIHR takes the opportunity to make recommendations on the legislative process itself. ODIHR provides direct assistance to lawmakers while the legislative process is under way. ODIHR experts work closely with local actors and make constructive recommendations that take into consideration the specifics of the domestic legal system. Assistance does not, however, end at the lawdrafting stage. Due attention is given to following up on recommendations both to clarify them for legislators and other relevant parties and, if necessary, to help incorporate them into the draft legislation under consideration. Such follow-up may take the form of conducting consultations with authorities and holding roundtable discussions on draft legislation. In May, for example, ODIHR took part in roundtable discussions in Chisinau on the draft Law on Political Parties. These discussions were organized within the framework of the Joint Project of the Council of Europe and the European Commission against Corruption, Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing in the Republic of Moldova. ODIHR’s comments on that draft served as one of the bases for the discussions. The roundtable provided the drafters, stakeholders, and representatives of the international community, including ODIHR, with an opportunity to present their views and comments and address any contentious issues. A number of suggestions for improvement of the draft law made by ODIHR were eventually taken into consideration by the authorities. While ODIHR uses this approach in all OSCE participating States, special efforts have been made within the framework of a joint programme with the European Commission with regard to Central Asia, where the work of legislators is often impeded by the scarcity of legal resources. The programme’s priorities included closely following legislative developments in the region, improving access to legal information, ensuring follow-up on ODIHR recommendations, and promoting local networks of legal expertise. A legislative assistance co-ordinator for Central Asia was appointed to increase ODIHR’s capacity in these areas and to mobilize the relevant expertise to fulfil these objectives. When addressing issues of relevance to lawmakers in a number of OSCE participating States, ODIHR may consider alternatives to providing expertise on individual laws. One option is to offer expertise through the drafting of guidelines aimed at informing those responsible for drafting legislation about the development and requirements of international law on the topic considered. Guidelines may include examples of national legislation illustrating various means of satisfying the requirements of international law. In 2005, it became apparent that too little guidance was available to legislators and other stakeholders on modes for regulating the exercise of freedom of peaceful assembly at the national level. Simultaneously, a number of states were in the process of developing or amending legislation on the subject. Therefore, ODIHR developed guidelines to serve as a reference document for drafting, reviewing, and monitoring the implementation of legislation on freedom of assembly that were published in 2007 in both English and Russian. The panel of experts that Annual Report 2007 37