Article 8 Verification and remedies  Refusal of access to certain materials must be taken by a judicial authority or is at least subject to a judicial review.  Access shall be free of charge.  When information is provided to suspects or accused persons, it must be noted using a recording procedure.  Right to challenge a possible failure or refusal of the competent authorities to provide information. Article 9 Training  Requirement to provide for training of ‘judges, prosecutors, police and judicial staff’ on the right to information. Article 10 Nonregression  Directive does not limit safeguards arising under international or national law offering higher level of protection. 2. Purpose and objectives We will cover the substantive requirements of the Directive in Parts I – IV below. However, in this introductory part it is already worth considering the general objective of the Directive, as this informs the way all of the substantive provisions should be interpreted. The recitals – which do not establish obligations in themselves, but will help interpret the obligations in the Directive – first provide some general wording: ‘(14) This Directive (…) lays down common minimum standards to be applied in the field of information about rights and about the accusation to be given to persons suspected or accused of having committed a criminal offence (…) This Directive builds on the rights laid down in the Charter, and in particular Articles 6, 47 and 48 thereof, by building upon Articles 5 and 6 ECHR as interpreted by the European Court of Human Rights.’ … ‘(33) The provisions of this Directive that correspond to rights guaranteed by the ECHR or the Charter should be interpreted and implemented consistently with those rights, as interpreted in the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights (…)’. These recitals capture the general tone of the Roadmap in building upon and consolidating rights arising from the ECHR as interpreted by the ECtHR. This is why, in this Toolkit, we provide you with relevant principles of ECHR case-law to show where the Directive is coming from. However, the Directive is clearer, easier to use, and it may also provide more robust protection than the ECtHR so we encourage you to base your arguments on the Directive itself as a rule. The other recitals then relate to, and in some cases elaborate upon, the specific rights in the Directive which are covered in this Toolkit. 11