Chapter 5 Access Access issues may be generally divided into two types: issues related to case identification and issues related to case monitoring regarding the progression of individual cases. The challenge related to case identification is to achieve a regular system of access that permits the fullest identification of those cases or proceedings relevant to monitoring. The challenge related to case monitoring is to achieve a level of access that permits the monitoring of hearings and the collection of case information as required by the focus of the programme. Securing regular access permits a programme to identify cases and systemize monitoring methodology, thereby improving the quality and consistency of monitoring results. Simply put, the greater the access, the more thorough and effective monitoring will be. As a result, all programmes must proactively and comprehensively address securing access. This requires analysing the domestic legal framework for provisions that govern public access to trials, laying the groundwork for monitoring activity with officials at all levels, and establishing internal procedures and strategies to maximize access. This chapter provides an overview of access issues, methods to increase access, and strategies to secure access to criminal proceedings and information related to individual cases. Strategies relating to gaining access to court documents and observing closed judicial hearings are also addressed as a means of expanding monitoring activities where consistent with the purpose and focus of programmes. 5.1 Identifying the legal framework The initial step in securing access for trial-monitoring activities is identifying the legal framework supporting trial-monitoring in applicable international and domestic law. Once the legal framework is identified, the legal status of the programme’s activities should be grounded in these obligations and commitments. Where monitoring is conducted in OSCE participating States, this is usually a two-part process. First, in the OSCE context, for some field operations such as those in Kosovo or Bosnia and Herzegovina, trial-monitoring is explicit in their mandate, while for other operations the mandate may refer more broadly to the promotion of OSCE commitments or support for judicial reform. As stated in Chapter 1.2, all OSCE participating States committed themselves to allow monitoring of trials under para. 12 of the Copenhagen Document in furtherance of their underlying commitments to ensuring the right to a fair trial. Therefore, OSCE trial-monitoring programmes may rely either on a specific mandate of the respective field operation or, even without a specific mandate, on the commitments made by all participating States to allow trial-monitoring by OSCE monitors, non-governmental organizations, and other interested persons. Trial-Monitoring: A Reference Manual for Practitioners 57