also implies guarantees that apply both before the trial commences28 and after the trial ends, at the execution phase.29 The scope of the Trial Monitoring Programme, however, is limited strictly to the trial stage and therefore the analysis contained in the Second TMP Report was restricted for the most part to fair trial rights and standards that can be monitored at trial proceedings. That some rights and standards were not commented upon was not due to oversight or to omission, but rather to the fact that the Trial Monitoring Programme did����� �������� not directly observe these ������������� issues�. The analysis in this Final Report includes a summary of the findings for the entire monitoring period for courts located in Chişinău, April 2006 to November 2008, and a summary of the findings from the entire period of monitoring in courts���������������������������������� in the �������������������������� Southeast, September 2007 to November 2008. This Final Report assesses whether any changes in conditions����������� ��������������������� , positive or negative, w�������������������������������������������������������������������������� ere����������������������������������������������������������������������� observed during the implementation of the Trial Monitoring Programme. This������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ assessment can be made only in the courts located in Chişinău where the monitoring took place over a longer period of time and the findings of the first two interim reports could be compared with the findings of subsequent monitoring. The period covered by the first two monitoring reports��������������������������������������������������������������������� ,�������������������������������������������������������������������� between April 2006 and May 2007������������������������������������ ,����������������������������������� is herein������������������������� after�������������������� referred to as the “first monitoring period.” The period between June 2007 and November 2008 is referred to as “the second monitoring period.” In addition to reporting findings for the�������������� se������������ monitoring periods, the purpose of this Final Report is to present to ������������������������������������� the ���������������������������������� Moldovan legal community, the donor community and any other interested parties a series of recommendations on how the problems identified might be addressed. The findings of this Final Report are based on observations of 7,402 ������������������������� hearings (7,037 in Chi������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������ ş����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� inău������������������������������������������������������������������������������������� and 365 in the Southeast) in 1,755 criminal cases (1,655 in ������������������������ Chi��������������������� ş�������������������� inău���������������� and 100 in the Southeast). The details by court and monitoring period are given in Tables 2–5. Table 2: Number of hearings monitored in the courts located in Chişinău Number of hearings monitored in the courts located in Chişinău, by monitoring period Courts located 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 Total number of hearings monitored First monitoring period: April 2006 – May 2007 88 338 646 198 444 305 376 Second monitoring period: June 2007 – November 2008 Entire monitoring period: April 2006 – November 2008 180 912 1070 474 780 481 745 268 1250 1716 672 1224 786 1121 2,395 4,642 7,037 28 ���� See Imbrioscia v. Switzerland, Judgment of European Court, 24 November 1993, para. 36. 29 ���� See Hornsby v. Greece, Judgment of European Court, 19 March 1997, para. 40. 21