Chapter 9 — Information Gathering and Verification in Systemic Trial Monitoring on the basis of examples from their own experience and can be a valuable source of information to complement or serve as a substitute for direct interviews with vulnerable parties. 9.3.5 Interviews with police Meeting directly with investigators or other police officials, including those specializing in witness protection, can enable trial monitors to gain a better understanding of aspects of trials in which the police are involved. A sample questionnaire on interviewing police can be found in Annex III.C. In addition, some OSCE field operations have specialized departments or units for building the capacity of police; their experience can yield a wealth of information that can be useful for trial-monitoring programmes. Protocol issues need to be respected in arranging interviews with the police. To the extent that programmes do not apply the principle of non-intervention to actors not involved directly in court proceedings, they may address recommendations to the police. 9.3.6 Interviews with governmental officials, judicial and prosecutorial councils, training and disciplinary bodies Monitoring programmes gather information regarding the functioning of certain aspects of the justice system by interviewing governmental officials at relevant ministries, i.e., the ministry of justice – or ministry of foreign affairs, when international obligations are at stake. Moreover, in many countries specialized councils independent of the executive carry out functions such as the selection and hiring of judges and prosecutors, the imposition of disciplinary measures, or training through judicial and prosecutorial training centres. Obtaining information from these bodies can enhance a programme’s outputs. Interviews with such officials are best conducted by programme managers, including legal analysts, as information gathering from these sources is often combined with advocacy activities and discussion on how to resolve identified shortcomings. In transitional justice systems where trial-monitoring programmes operate, there is often a need for a clearer delineation of responsibilities between ministries of justice and those of judicial bodies. Any recommendations addressed to such bodies need to specify clearly who should be in charge of implementing the recommendation. Clarifying competencies in advance through interviews and gauging the stakeholders’ views on realistic solutions will enable a programme to issue targeted and realistic recommendations, as well as to have a partner for advocacy and other follow-up activities. Moreover, establishing co-operation with governmental and judicial co-ordination bodies can facilitate obtaining statistical data that these actors keep in connection with the functioning of various aspects of a justice system. These can pertain to the staffing of courts and prosecutors’ offices, the caseload each court has according to the types of cases, the efficiency of processing cases according to concrete criteria, the number of cases resolved by special procedures, such as plea agreements, and so forth. These statistical data may be used in combination with other statistics gathered by a monitoring programme to support its findings or when contemplating whether to direct monitoring operations to a different field in need. 9.3.7 Communication with the international community and NGOs in a host country Establishing close contacts with representatives of the international community within a host country, i.e., embassies, donors, European Union (EU) or Council of Europe (CoE) offices, and other intergovernmental organizations or NGOs that follow justice issues, is not only important in terms of co-ordinating projects, but also facilitates sharing information. Meeting on a regular basis with organizations that have a stake in the functioning of a justice system provides a trial-monitoring programme with a wider perspective, which can often contribute to shaping reforms. International 83