EXECUTIVE SUMMARY General remarks about the Trial Monitoring Programme in the Republic of Moldova: The Trial Monitoring Programme was developed by the OSCE Mission to Moldova in partnership with OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR). Monitoring started on 19 April 2006 in the following courts located in the municipality of Chişinău: Botanica, Buiucani, Centru, Ciocana and Rîşcani District Courts; the Chişinău Court of Appeals and the Supreme Court of Justice. Since September 2007 the Trial Monitoring Programme has been extended to the Southeast of the country to the following courts: Anenii Noi, Căuşeni and Ştefan Vodă District Courts and the Bender Court of Appeals. Court monitoring ended on 30 November 2008. The Trial Monitoring Programme sought to assess the observance of internationally recognized fair trial standards and corresponding individual rights of the defendant, victim and witness; and to review the de facto functioning of the courts in general to the extent that it can be observed by monitoring court proceedings. The analysis in this Final Report includes a summary of the findings for the entire monitoring period. It compares the current situation with the findings of the first two interim reports. It notes any differences between Chişinău courts and those located in the Southeast of the country. In addition, this Final Report presents the Moldovan legal community, the donor community and other interested parties with a series of recommendations on how the problems identified might be addressed. Findings related to institutional conditions: Court facilities are mostly inappropriate. The conditions of the courtrooms are largely poor. Courts lack adequate equipment. Heating remains a problem in winter. None of the courts monitored has separate entrances or special waiting rooms for victims and witnesses. Basic public facilities such as toilets and running water are generally not available to the public or are very shabby. The courts are marked by organizational shortcomings, including cascading delays and postponements; 61% of scheduled hearings were postponed in the courts in Chişinău and 85% in Southeast of Moldova. Poor punctuality is an accepted practice. Courts of Appeals have better premises and facilities than the district courts but are still overcrowded and the dominant atmosphere is chaotic. The practice of scheduling too many trials on any one day continued in Courts of Appeals and in the Supreme Court of Justice. Findings related to the professional performance of participants: Participants in all categories and all courts exhibited a lack of concentration and attention to the proceedings. Judges rarely admonished behaviour such as use of mobile phones or making inappropriate jokes or comments. Prosecutors and defence lawyers entered judges’ offices before hearings. Participants used inappropriate expressions. In addition to the effect