Challenges and how to overcome them Researching on and with suspected and accused persons also poses serious challenges. It needs to be considered that persons in police custody are at a particularly high risk of torture and illtreatment and that talking to researchers/ CSO representatives may increase this risk. Research must therefore expressly address the issue of possible risks and ensure that the principle of ‘do no harm’ is followed. Therefore, it is useful to conduct an explicit risk assessment as part of every research plan. Further guidance on how to interview suspects and accused can be found in guide books e.g. on monitoring police custody.90 Access may be an additional challenge in research. In many countries researchers cannot easily access police stations let alone observe interrogations. EXAMPLE In the ‘Inside Police Custody 2’ project “some national research teams had to radically revise their research methodology as a result of lack of cooperation, 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 cooperation 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.” Therefore, it is very important to build trustful relations with the authorities and convince them that more transparency and external evaluations are necessary and useful (see above, § 2.4). In general, conditions should be created to ensure independent monitoring and collection of data. As reported in a recent report by Fair Trials, “depending on good partnerships with state authorities in order to be allowed access to prisons to deploy studies, or having authorities dismissing people’s accounts of injustice, carries the risk of researchers self-censoring in their work.”91 Moreover, close cooperation with institutions that have privileged access, such as NHRIs and NPMs may remedy the lack of access and should be fostered. Past projects have shown NHRIs and NPMs can play a bigger role in the strengthening of procedural rights. While many NHRIs and NPMs are routinely monitoring procedural rights in the early stages of custody, others do not do it often enough, due to lack of resources, capacities, or different strategic priorities.92 National oversight mechanisms remain, however, key allies and precious sources of information in the monitoring of procedural rights. Another key challenge is to ensure that research generates the desired impact. Experts emphasised the importance of bringing research back to the communities. Further, it needs to be acknowledged that research can only be one part of the change process and needs to be followed up and combined with other change tools. 90. See Michael Kellett, ‘Monitoring Police Custody: A practical guide’ (APT 2013); See some of our reflections in the context of research in prison: Fair Trials, ‘Equality Data in Criminal Justice: Report’ (2022); The Méndez Principles (2021: Michael Boyle and Jean-Claude Vullierme, ‘A Brief Introduction to Investigative Interviewing: A Practitioner’s Guide’ (CPT 2018). 91. Fair Trials, ‘Equality Data in Criminal Justice’ (2022) 27. 92. Giuliana Monina and Nora Katona, ’Strengthening the Rights of Suspects and Accused in Criminal Proceedings the Role of National Human Rights Institutions’ Institutions’ (Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Fundamental and Human Rights, 2019) 9, 107. See also Giuliana Monina ‘Strengthening The Prevention Of Torture In South-East Europe: For The Effective Monitoring Of Safeguards In Police Custody: Final Report’ (Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Fundamental and Human Rights, 2021) written in the framework of the Project “Strengthening the Prevention of Torture in South-East Europe: for an Effective Monitoring of Safeguards in Police Custody”. The project was implemented on the occasion of the Croatian Chairmanship of the South East Europe NPM Network (SEE NPM Network) by the Croatian National Preventive Mechanism, in cooperation with the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Fundamental and Human Rights, the Association for the Prevention of Torture and with the financial support of the Joint Project “European NPM Forum”, funded by the European Union and the Council of Europe, and implemented by the Council of Europe. 36