Chapter 3 — Choosing an Institutional Model The project model may, thus, be a useful approach for organizations that do not have a large field presence in a host country or that seek to build the capacity of local lawyers while still retaining control over a monitoring programme. Consistent with the emphasis on local ownership, reporting in OSCE project models is usually done in local language(s), with final reports translated into English and/or Russian. Project model trial monitoring in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan: increasing transparency and assessing compliance with international fair trial standards Beginning in 2004, ODIHR, in co-operation with the OSCE Centres in Almaty and Bishkek, launched longterm trial-monitoring programmes using the project model in Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan, respectively. These programmes entailed the recruitment and training of 25 local lawyers in each country to monitor criminal trials systematically. Under the direction of the project co-ordinator, these recent law school graduates and young practicing lawyers were assigned to monitor trials in designated courts. A primary objective of both programmes was to obtain reliable information on criminal justice practices to support ongoing efforts to improve compliance with fair trial standards and reform of the judiciary. Other important aims were to train and build the capacity of local lawyers to monitor and report on criminal trials, and to publish widely the findings of their monitoring. Among the achievements of these programmes was the attainment of greater access to criminal trials, including an openness on the part of criminal courts, judges and prosecutors to the presence of monitors, consistent with the right to a public trial. 3.3 Domestic trial-monitoring organizations or coalitions Another alternative for organizing a trial-monitoring programme is for an international organization to provide support to an independent domestic monitoring organization or coalition. Unlike an international trial-monitoring operation, a domestic monitoring organization may operate as a local NGO or coalition of NGOs under domestic law and usually consists entirely of national citizens. Relevant local law should, therefore, be reviewed to determine the need to register an organization or any other requirements. Domestic observer organizations generally focus exclusively on the right to a public trial under international law and applicable domestic law. Therefore, in states where this right is not always respected, domestic observer groups may have difficulty securing access to case information. Even where restrictions exist, however, domestic observer groups may still have a significant impact on transparency by underscoring the right to a public trial and raising awareness of international fair trial standards. Domestic observer groups may adopt either a staff model or a project model, using their own staff for monitoring or engaging monitors on a contract basis, respectively. Tapping a wide coalition of NGOs has the advantage that it may provide a wider geographic presence and coverage. On the whole, domestic organizations represent the greatest level of local ownership in the process of trial monitoring. This form of co-operation with domestic organizations may encounter certain challenges. Capacity-building to carry out monitoring activities may be of primary importance. Capacity, however, will usually develop slowly, and difficulties should be expected. These can relate both to monitoring operations and to organizational issues such as management, funding and the development of expertise. Furthermore, since domestic organizations tend to be independent in their operations, they might have different perceptions or approaches to methodology than would be followed by the OSCE in the same context. For instance, unlike OSCE programmes, domestic NGOs may focus on the merits 31