Inside Police Custody 2 Direct observations In order to observe criminal justice practitioners as they go about their daily routine work, researchers were to be located in a number of police stations, and also accompany a sample of lawyers advising clients at police stations. The purpose was to understand the implementation of suspects’ rights from multiple perspectives and to gain a deeper insight into practical influences and constraints upon working practices. Researchers were asked to keep a narrative log of their observations. Interviews It was planned to conduct semi-structured interviews with a number of police officers and lawyers. In order to enable researchers to secure relevant information and to ask appropriate questions, the interviews were planned to take place after the observation stage of the research was completed. This meant that researchers would be able to probe answers that did not reflect their observations, and gain insights into the motivations that influenced practice. Research teams were provided with interview pro-formas that could be adapted to local circumstances. Analysis of case pro-formas Case pro-formas (one for cases observed by researchers when based in police stations, and another for researchers when based with lawyers) were adapted from the first Inside Police Custody study with a view to enabling researchers to secure some quantitative data: for example, about the proportion of suspects who sought to exercise their right of access to a lawyer, socio-demographic characteristics of suspects, the time taken for lawyer/client consultations, and the proportion of suspects who exercised their right to silence. It was anticipated that national research teams would have to adapt the methodology, and the research instruments, to take account of local circumstances. However, some national research teams had to radically revise their research methodology as a result of lack of co-operation, at a political and administrative (that is, relevant government ministries) level, and on the part of the police. Despite the fact that observational research in police stations has been conducted in previous projects in a range of countries with the co-operation of the relevant authorities, that the research was funded by the European Commission, and that assurances were provided regarding the confidentiality of research data (so that no person or location could be identified from any published data, and that research data would be stored securely), agreement for researchers to be based in police stations and/or to accompany lawyers to police stations, was not forthcoming in a number of countries in the study. Whilst access to police stations by researchers was secured in Austria, Lithuania, Romania and Slovenia, it was not forthcoming in Bulgaria, Italy, Hungary or Poland. In Spain, agreement could not be obtained at the national level, but the national research team was able to secure permission to conduct observational research in police stations in the Basque region.3 Italy may be regarded as a special case. Whilst permission to observe in police stations was not secured, generally suspects are not interviewed by the police following arrest, but appear at an arrest validation hearing where, depending on the procedure adopted, they may be questioned by a judge. Nevertheless, many provisions of the EU Directives apply where a person is arrested and detained, and observations conducted at police stations would have enabled data to have been obtained about implementation of these aspects of the Directives. In those countries in which observational research could not be carried out, other methods of seeking data about how procedural rights at the investigative stage work in practice were developed and adopted. Such It should be noted that whilst references are made to Spain throughout the report, the research was conducted only in the Basque region, and whilst some laws referred to are applicable nationally, regulations and practices reported by the researchers may not be valid throughout Spain. 3 10