150 Trial Monitoring: A Reference Manual for Practitioners and analysis themselves, but this does not detract from the need to staff the analytical function adequately. In OSCE experience, having one legal analyst for each three monitors or monitoring teams should ensure that proper attention is paid to all monitoring inputs, that the requisite feedback and direction is provided to monitors, and that the final report is drafted quickly and efficiently. As in systemic and thematic trial monitoring, higher-level staff of ad hoc teams whose regular functions do not include direct observation of proceedings should, nonetheless, strive to attend at least some hearings, in order to gain first-hand experience of the justice system and the challenges the monitors may face. Ad hoc monitoring activities may be organized according to either staff or project models, or use a combination of both.227 The decision made should take into account the availability of internal and external resources, as well as the context and sensitivities of the monitoring activity. In ODIHR’s experience, ad hoc monitoring had been carried out entirely by ODIHR and OSCE field-operation, personnel (Uzbekistan, 2005), or with the involvement of external international experts (Belarus, 2011) or national monitors (Armenia, 2008-2009). 19.2 Staffing issues 19.2.1 Nationality and experience When monitoring is carried out in sensitive contexts by international organizations, proper attention must be given to the programme’s image of independence and impartiality, as well as to the security of personnel. For these reasons OSCE ad hoc monitoring teams have usually been staffed by non-nationals of the host country. The inclusion of national monitors may be appropriate when these considerations do not weigh strongly and may be balanced by efficiency and financial considerations. For example, the ODIHR ad hoc project in Armenia (2008-2009) initially paired international and national monitors, but as the monitoring progressed and gained acceptance, teams composed of national monitors gradually replaced the mixed pairs. If time pressure precludes formal training of monitors before the start of the project, it is advisable for project managers to hire experienced individuals with backgrounds in legal practice and trial or human rights monitoring. While a legal background is an advantage, ad hoc projects have also had some positive experiences with non-lawyers as monitors, e.g., persons with a background in journalism. On occasion, non-lawyers with a sound knowledge of the local context have provided valuable perspectives and made a more thorough record of the proceedings. As the time-frame for identifying monitors may be short, organizations likely to engage in ad hoc trial monitoring can greatly benefit from a regularly updated roster of interested and qualified candidates, who can be contacted to staff a new operation on short notice. If national monitors are recruited, proper competitive recruitment processes will add credibility to the operation. If circumstances exclude this option, professional networks of reliable international and domestic actors may be utilized to attract qualified candidates. 19.2.2 Project-scale issues The scale of an ad hoc project will depend on the number of cases and hearings to be monitored, on whether they are processed in geographical and temporal proximity, and on the available budget. Ad hoc projects carried out by ODIHR have varied from more than 20 monitors following approximately 100 trials over one year (Armenia, 2008-2009), to three monitors tasked with observing a single trial spanning several weeks (Uzbekistan, 2005). The decision whether to pair monitors will 227 See Chapter 3, “Choosing and institutional model”.