Chapter 7 — Programme Structure and Staffing Issues Overview of OSCE experience with the nationality of monitors Consideration National monitor International monitor Monitoring experience and knowledge of applicable laws • less likely to find candidates with monitoring experience and skills • likely to have monitoring experience, but will still have to be trained on programme methods and requirements. • need training on programme methods and requirements • more likely to be familiar with domestic law and practice; may need additional training on international human rights standards • more likely to be familiar with international human rights standards, including on fair trial and legal practice in a foreign state; will need to become proficient in domestic law. Language • can observe and review documents without interpretation • requires local language skills or an interpreter. Cost • less expensive, as already resides in local area and is paid at local rates • more expensive to hire and support. Perception of impartiality • less likely to be viewed as unbiased, especially where monitoring is of post-conflict cases involving war crimes, ethnic violence or other sectarian issues • more likely to be viewed as an impartial observer within the goals of the programme; however, bias may still be attributed depending on the monitor’s nationality or other factors. Susceptibility to pressure • more likely to be deterred by access limitations or other pressure to not report critically • less likely to be deterred by access issues, given that there is no permanent connection to local actors Capacity-building/ long-term commitment • likely to remain in the country with acquired knowledge and skills • less likely to continue working in the country after the completion of the project; likely, however, to continue in a monitoring, advisory or capacity-building role in other field operations. • more likely to continue monitoring for longer periods and/or subsequent projects. 61