A problem noted in all courts monitored is the slowness with which hearing �������������������� minutes ������������ are taken. This problem may be from the lack of stenographers and not solely the fault of court clerks. Court clerks typically write slowly, often interrupting the parties or trial participants to ask them to repeat what ������������������������������������������������������������������ was��������������������������������������������������������������� just said. Many times the court clerk does not understand, or claims to not understand, a statement�������������������������������������������������������� ;������������������������������������������������������� the judge then dictates to the clerk what to write in the minutes, often paraphrasing what the trial participant has said. Vignette: When hearing the witnesses, the judge dictated to the court clerk what to write in a separate statement to be attached to the minutes. He whispered to her to write only what he, the magistrate, was saying and not what the witness was stating. This tendency is understandable in that judges wish to speed up the examination of a case to meet the reasonable time requirement. It is problematic, however, because judges may be violating the principle that requires the judge to base his or her decision only on evidence examined directly in court. In the case of paraphrasing, the minutes of the hearing will include the paraphrase and not a word for word quotation of what the witness actually stated. In addition to impacting upon the reasonable time requirement, the slow process of taking minutes often interferes with the testimony itself as the trial participants are constantly stopped and asked to speak up, speak slower, repeat what has just been said, etc. The onerous process used by the courts for minutes may cause witnesses to lose their line of thought and give incomplete or inaccurate testimony. This repetition can also be traumatic��,� especially for victims of domestic violence or trafficking. Monitor���������������������������������������������������������������������������������� s��������������������������������������������������������������������������������� reported several cases in which the court clerk was not taking the minutes, but overstepping his��������������������������������������������������������������������������� ������������������������������������������������������������������������������ duties by asking questions to the participant����������������������������� testifying on the stand����� . In one case the prosecutor protested, asking ironically if he had changed places with the court clerk. Monitors noted cases in which court clerks behaved unethically. Court clerks were observed addressing the trial participants in a brutal way; speaking on their mobile phones during a hearing and failing to record what took ������������������������������������������������� place��������������������������������������� during their telephone conversations. Monitors noted instances of court clerks speaking with one of the parties during the hearing, even openly flirting with the defence lawyer or prosecutor. Although such instances of inappropriate behaviour were noted during the second monitoring period in Chişinău and in the Southeast, monitors noted th�������������������������������������������������������� at such ����������������������������������������������������� instances were exceptions rather than the rule. By the end of the monitoring period, monitors noted a commendable improvement in the openness and politeness of court clerks. The First TMP Report noted that many court clerks dressed in an inappropriately casual style, even overtly provocative in some instances. Monitors reported an improvement in this respect during the second monitoring period. One ����������������������������������������������� possible reason for this������������������� is the entry into force of the new Law on Court Clerks, requiring court clerks to comply with an appropriate dress code during court hearings. Moreover, the Law on Court Clerks provided for court clerks to ������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ receive����������������������������������������������������������������������������� ���������������������������������������������������������������������������� a dress code���������������������������������������������������������������� appropriate to their court. The court clerks’ dress code is to be approved by Government decision.58 Monitors noticed clerks wearing robes only in the Ciocana District Court. The dress code provision has not been implemented in any other court. 58 �������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� See Art. 21 of the Law on the Status and Organization of the Court Clerks’ Activity in the Courts. 45