A Monitoring Guide 125 not essential, and the Court stated that national authorities must have personnel with appropriate skills, and ought instead to rely on the consistency and plausibility of the statements of the person concerned. Monitoring checklist Is there any indication that LGBT persons are sent back to their countries of origin where they may be at risk of persecution on grounds of their sexual orientation or gender identity? Are “safe-country” lists used to speed-up asylum procedures? Is there evidence that such lists include countries where LGBT persons would be at risk of persecution on the grounds of their sexual orientation or gender identity? Are interviews with asylum seekers conducted in private to ensure that LGBT asylum seekers can disclose their sexual orientation or gender identity in a safe and dignified manner? Is information provided about the fact that asylum claims can be made on the basis of persecution stemming from asylum seekers’ sexual orientation or gender identity? Are asylum seekers given the possibility to choose the gender of both the interviewer and the interpreter? Are asylum seekers given the possibility to choose the nationality/ethnicity of the interpreter? Are officers assessing asylum claims trained/sensitised about the specific needs of and risks for LGBTI persons? Is similar training offered to interpreters? Chapter V Are LGBT migrants expected to “prove” their sexual orientation or gender identity during asylum claim procedures? Is there evidence that humiliating questions or degrading practices are used by immigration officers assessing asylum claims?