As indicated in the following table, the monitoring noted some changes in the quality of interpretation in some courts during the monitoring period. Table 16: Performance of interpreters during trial proceedings (Courts in Chişinău) Supreme Court of Justice Chişinău Court of Appeals Centru District Court Ciocana District Court Rîşcani District Court Botanica District Court Buiucani District Court Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Monitoring period I Monitoring period II Unsatisfactory Monitoring period II, June 2007 – November 2008 Mixed Court Monitoring period I, April 2006 – May 2007 Satisfactory Periods monitored: Performance of interpreters during trials 80% 100% 63% 70% 63% 63% 47% 96% 56% 41% 73% 62% 48% 39% 20% 0% 8% 12% 22% 18% 0% 0% 26% 32% 11% 23% 17% 30% 0% 0% 29% 18% 15% 19% 53% 4% 18% 27% 16% 15% 35% 31 This data shows that the performance of interpreters improved significantly in the Supreme Court of Justice and the Ciocana District Court from 80% satisfactory ���������������������������������� to ��������������������� 100% and from 47% to 96%, respectively. Improvement also was observed in the Chişinău Court of Appeals. The performance of interpreters worsened�������������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������������������������� in the Rîşcani, Botanica and Buiucani District Courts, and remained the same in the Centru District Court. One explanation might be the small number of cases on the basis of which the data were analysed. The differences in the figures, especially the declines, indicate��������������������������������������������������� ����������������������������������������������������������� that further inquiry into this problem is ne������ eded��. With respect to the performance of interpreters in the Southeast, the following table indicates that the most problematic courts are the Căuşeni District Court and the Anenii Noi District Court, with the Bender Court of Appeals and the Ştefan Vodă District Court doing very well. Again, this data should be read with the caveat that the analysis is done on the basis of the small number of cases in which an interpreter was present. 47