• Other actors involved should be alerted well in advance of their responsibilities. Once the report is finalized within the programme, issuance will often require review by other authorities within the operation and/or external review or consultation depending on the approach of the programme. So that this process will be efficient, all of these actors should be advised well in advance of when they will receive the report. Advance notice allows reviewers to plan and schedule their time accordingly and make alternative arrangements so that good working relationships are maintained and the report is not delayed. • It is useful to plan for the logistical aspects of issuing a report. Translation, printing, and distribution may all be time-consuming processes. Issuance of a report simultaneously in multiple languages allows all stakeholders to have access to information at the same time and facilitates a dialogue that is integral to follow-up. Translation should be completed as early as possible so that reports may be released at the earliest possible time. Likewise, reports may have to be formatted and printed by a printing house with its own procedures and schedules. Programmes must incorporate this process into their planning as well. Depending on geography, distribution must also be considered to make the report widely available. 8.5 Other information-sharing and non-public reporting Some OSCE programmes also issue non-public reports on a regular or ad hoc basis. Such reports are not publicly disseminated and are usually provided to a specific recipient for a limited purpose. Such reporting allows monitoring programmes to serve additional purposes where the public release of information might compromise the ability of the programme to fulfil its main purposes or where the information might not benefit a wider audience. The most significant and regularized dissemination of such reports is presented below. Example of non-public report: war-crimes reporting to the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY) Pursuant to Decision No. 673 of the OSCE Permanent Council, individual OSCE field operations in South-Eastern Europe have arranged to share war-crimes monitoring reports with the Office of the Prosecutor (OTP) at the ICTY. Under this arrangement, these field operations provide reports to the OTP ICTY on the progression of war-crimes cases transferred by the ICTY to the national jurisdictions pursuant to Rule 11 bis of the ICTY’s Rules of Procedure and Evidence. Such monitoring is performed within the existing mandates of the relevant OSCE field operations. Although formats and content of such reports to the OTP ICTY differ, the purpose of monitoring is, inter alia, to assess the application of international fair-trial and other criminal justice standards to the proceedings. 8.5.1 Information-sharing practices generally Monitoring programmes will often have current information regarding high-profile cases such as war crimes, trafficking, or other politically sensitive cases, as well as more general information and statistics regarding the functioning of the criminal justice 114 Trial-Monitoring: A Reference Manual for Practitioners