32 Trial Monitoring: A Reference Manual for Practitioners of cases or may be outspokenly critical in ways that would not be appropriate for an international organization. Moreover, in supporting a coalition of NGOs, challenges may arise as to decision-making, especially when the number of participating organizations increases, making management more cumbersome. In addition, even when domestic groups or coalitions are able to perform monitoring functions independently, they may often require donor funding to continue operations. Consequently, building an organization’s capacity to raise funds may also be required for it eventually to operate autonomously. Coalition All for Fair Trials, a domestic observer group In 2002, the Rule of Law Unit within the OSCE Spillover Monitor Mission to Skopje began to facilitate the creation of what would later become a formal coalition of 20 NGOs, called “All for Fair Trials”. On 23 May 2003, the coalition formed in accordance with domestic law, with a general assembly, executive board and a network of 80 observers throughout the country. Among the primary goals of the coalition was to raise public awareness of international fair trial standards and increase public trust in the legal system. It also specifically sought to identify problems in the judiciary as a means to illustrating the need for legal and institutional reform. Since the publication of its initial report in 2004, the coalition has been commissioned to undertake several monitoring projects not only for the OSCE but also for other international organizations, such as the Swedish Helsinki Committee for Human Rights and the Soros Foundation. These trial-monitoring activities have included projects and public reports focused on selected aspects of criminal justice related to the prosecution of cases of trafficking, election-related offences, corruption and organized crime. With its trial-monitoring methodology fully developed and a permanent supervisory staff in place, the coalition worked with the Mission to strengthen its fundraising capacity. This included developing its capacity to engage independently in project development with donors without the need for financial support from the OSCE. 3.4 Hybrid trial-monitoring model – partnership The term “hybrid model” is used here to describe a combination of the staff model and the project model as they have been used by the OSCE in partnership with domestic organizations. Such partnerships in trial monitoring are another strategy for building local capacity, as well as for raising the profile and effectiveness of trial monitoring by creating a coalition of groups engaged in monitoring and advocacy activities. From an operational point of view, partnerships are also mechanisms to share organizational responsibilities for programme management. In the OSCE, hybrid models have compensated for a lack of staffing by partnering with other organizations to fulfil basic programme functions, such as drafting training materials and manuals, providing training and writing reports. When forming partnerships, consideration should be given to formalizing the relationship, by entering into a memorandum of understanding (MoU) that sets out mutual obligations and programme aims and outputs. MoUs serve as references for operations and establish timelines for activities and responsibilities. When choosing a partner for a programme, it is important to agree on the programme’s purpose, methodology and time-frame. The discussion and negotiation of an MoU is an important part of this process.35 The adoption of a hybrid-model partnership can also be seen as part of an exit strategy for international organizations engaged in trial monitoring, when conditions are appropriate and domestic capacity exists. This was the case in Croatia, where, in anticipation of the closing of the OSCE Office in Zagreb, which monitored war crimes proceedings for several years using a staff model, the Office 35  A sample MoU can be requested from the ODIHR Democratisation Department.