Even if instructions are not specifically included on a sample reporting form as above, general reporting instructions should be issued to improve the consistency of reporting methodology, thereby enhancing the capacity to assess and compile reports. Instructions are equally important for closed reporting systems, which are also susceptible to divergent approaches to reporting despite the more structured format. 6.4.2 Simplifying factual reporting The necessity of reporting the facts and evidence of a case is an issue that relates directly to the purposes of monitoring. For programmes monitoring trials solely from a procedural perspective, evidence related to the circumstances of the underlying crime is often irrelevant to an analysis of the application of domestic law, fair-trial standards, or other issues related to the functioning of the courts. When this is the case, detailed reporting regarding testimony, documents, and other evidence presented at trial has the potential to unnecessarily complicate or lengthen reports, as well as shift attention and focus from procedural issues or fair-trial rights to the merits of a case. For these reasons, in designing an efficient reporting system, programmes should seek to minimize the reporting of evidence as far as possible in line with the purpose of the programme. For programmes that seek to limit reporting evidence relating to the underlying crime, two situations should be kept in mind where reporting on evidence and facts may be important to the focus of monitoring. Reporting facts to illustrate the application of fair-trial standards or other issues Reporting facts and evidence may at times help illustrate the application of domestic laws or fair-trial standards. In particular, the right to confront witnesses, present evidence and witnesses, have effective defence counsel, and other fair-trial protections may be difficult to fully assess in some cases without some treatment or reference to the facts of the case. For example: • Where a conviction is based on an unchallenged statement in the police file, reporting on the content and significance of the statement may illustrate the violation of the right to confront witnesses, or alternatively a problem with the effectiveness of a defence counsel who failed to cross-examine the witness; • If a conviction is based upon illegally seized evidence, a compelled confession, or the testimony of a defendant who was not provided with instructions regarding their rights, discussion of the content and significance of evidence may help illustrate the nature of the right violated; • Where monitoring seeks to assess adversarial trial rules that place the obligation to provide evidence on the prosecutor, a description of the significance of the evidence presented by the judge (as opposed to the prosecutor) may illustrate the extent to which the judge is engaging in the prosecution and therefore demonstrates the implementation of the new trial rule; • Where monitoring seeks to document the need for, or effectiveness of, witness-protection measures, e.g., where earlier statements are recanted, a comparison between an earlier incriminating statement and the testimony at trial may highlight the need for effective witness-protection measures. 78 Trial-Monitoring: A Reference Manual for Practitioners