Inside Police Custody 2 development of ‘vade mecums’ on cooperation between the police and interpreters, as well as the continuous exchange of these professional groups, for instance through inter-disciplinary roundtables. 2. The way police currently inform about procedural rights should urgently be evaluated with regards to accessibility, since the understanding of rights is the prerequisite for their active use. Furthermore, more accessible texts could be drafted for the existing information sheets, with the help of experts on easy and accessible language. In particular, existing uncertainties regarding the allocation of costs of legal representation during the investigation proceedings should be dispelled. Police officers should be further sensitised to the need to inform about rights and obligations not only in a correct, but also in an understandable manner. Above all, the right of access to a lawyer during the investigation proceedings should not be ‘belittled’ – in light of the current practice, it seems important to sensitise police officers accordingly. 3. Summonses for questioning of persons who are not arrested should always be sent in writing and, in case of juveniles and persons with guardians, summonses should always be sent to the legal representative as well, to ensure an effective exercise of rights. It should be explicitly noted in the summons that the consultation of a lawyer is not only a right, but that the exercise of this right does not imply disadvantages for the accused person. 4. A general introduction of electronic files and a comprehensive granting of access to the electronic case files would save resources of all parties involved and should, therefore, be applied in the investigative stage. 5. The right of access to a lawyer during the investigation proceedings, in particular for persons who are later granted legal aid or that are particularly vulnerable (e.g. juveniles) should be strengthened and structured more effectively in the context of the Directive on legal aid for suspects and accused persons in criminal proceedings and the Directive on procedural safeguards for children who are suspects or accused persons in criminal proceedings. While in cases of arrested persons, a lawyer should generally always be present during the interview, it would be important to introduce mandatory defence during investigation proceedings at least for juveniles. To waive the right of access to a lawyer should only be possible after consultation with the stand-by legal counselling service. 6. In the framework of police training and continuing education, as well as in the everyday work of police officers, awareness should be increased about the legitimacy of the right to remain silent and about the importance of providing adequate information about this right. This awareness-raising should also lead to the recognition that even the partial use of the right to remain silent is not used against a suspected person. 7. Audiovisual recordings of interviews, which is already used in many other countries, should also be introduced in Austria. Audiovisual recordings that can only be waived in cases where legal representation is present would constitute an optimal approach to documenting the interview and achieving the highest possible value for it as evidence in later proceedings. In addition, it could considerably unburden police officials from having to write minutes and enable them to focus exclusively on the interview of the accused person. 8. Remedies to tackle violations of the rights of suspects and accused persons during investigation proceedings should be strengthened for them to become more effective. 65