functions as an integral part of the national legal system and is to be applied directly. The jurisprudence of the European Court is binding on the courts of Moldova and maintains priority over incompatible national legal provisions. �������������������������������������� Likewise, the Criminal Code, Criminal Procedure Code, Civil Code, and Civil Procedure Code refer to the supremacy of international law. 1.2. Value of Trial Monitoring As a participating S������������������������������������������������������������������ ������������������������������������������������������������������� tate of the OSCE since 1992, the Republic of Moldova has accepted as a confidence building measure the presence of observers in proceedings before its national courts. Moldova thus recognizes that trial observation is a means to ensuring a well-functioning judiciary and effective human rights protections. As noted in the OSCE Copenhagen Commitment: The participating States, wishing to ensure greater transparency in the implementation of the commitments undertaken in the Vienna Concluding Document under the heading of the human dimension of the CSCE [now the OSCE], decide to accept as a confidence building measure the presence of observers sent by participating States and representatives of non-governmental organizations and other interested persons at proceedings before courts as provided for in national legislation and international law; it is understood that proceedings may only be held in camera in the circumstances prescribed by law and consistent with obligations under international law and international commitments.10 Building upon OSCE/ODIHR experience in other countries, it has been concluded that utilizing national trial observation networks increases the awareness of civil society of court procedures and the functioning of the judiciary and also serves as a means to enhance trust among citizens in the judicial system. As is often quoted, “Justice must not only be done, but must be seen to be done.”11 This principle of “open justice” lies at the heart of trial monitoring because justice implies fair outcomes achieved through fair procedures. The appropriate observer is a fair-minded observer who acts reasonably. In order for the justice system truly to function fairly and for the public to believe that it functions fairly, it is useful to identify, train, and support a national cadre of such fair-minded observers. Laws and Treaties; Decision of Constitutional Court on Interpretation of Certain Provisions of Art. 4 of the Constitution of the Republic of Moldova No. 55 (14 October 1999), para. 6, 8, 11 and No. 6 (ruling that universally recognized norms and principles of international law are binding in Moldova to the extent that it has agreed to be bound, and that international treaties represent an integral part of the national legal framework and supersede national law in any conflict between the two); and Art.s 2 and 7 of the Criminal Procedure Code.  ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ See Decision of Supreme Court of Justice on the Application in Judiciary Practice by Judiciary Institutions of Certain Provisions of the Convention on the Protection of Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms No. 17 (19 June 2000), para. 2 and 3 (the ECHR is an integral part of the international legal system, is directly applicable, and supersedes national law in cases of conflict). One example of an incompatible provision with the ECHR was Art. 191 of the Criminal Procedure Code, before the amendment of 21 December 2006. It contravened Art. 5(3) of the ECHR by excluding the right of any defendant charged with an offence punishable with a sentence of more than 10 years from the possibility of release under judicial control. See Boicenco v. Moldova, judgment of 11 July 2006, para. 134-137.  Criminal Code Art. 1(3); Criminal Procedure Code Art. 2; Civil Code Art. 7; Code of Civil Procedure Art. 2(3). 10 ������������������������������������������������������������� OSCE Copenhagen Commitment (1990), para. 12 (emphasis added). 11 Delcourt v. Belgium, Judgment of 17 January 1970, para. 31. 12