Although the challenges are well-known and reform needs have been identified, implementation is lagging behind and many countries continue to face the same issues. Thus, there remains an urgent need to tackle this implementation gap. Objective Based on the above considerations, this project has been developed and implemented with two key questions in mind: WHAT can be done to support the practical implementation of reforms? HOW can this best be done, for example, which methods and tools make work on strengthening procedural rights more effective? In a nutshell, the project recognises that while change has to be evidence-based and offer practical solutions, law and research evidence alone do not create change. Recognising that you cannot force change upon a system, but change has to happen from within, it requires multiple actors to play a role, including those within the criminal system as well as civil society. In order to contribute to this debate, the project focused on three main avenues: 1. Elaboration of and exchange on promising practices 2. Engaging key criminal justice stakeholders in broad discussions about effective strategies and reform efforts 3. Involving and fostering exchange between civil society organisations All contributed to the overall project goal to strengthen the implementation of procedural rights in police custody. The collection of promising practices was the back-bone of the project and aimed to: provide the necessary degree of technical specificity to inspire and guide stakeholders from other countries; reflect upon how reform efforts and promising practices came about; identify lessons learnt. In this light, we believe that the project is innovative in two ways: first, it takes a constructive approach focusing on “promising practices” rather than on a detailed analysis of the challenges; second, it tackles not only the substance of promising practices (‘what’) but also reform processes, engaging itself with the question how to best initiate and achieve change. In fact, while a wide literature exists on challenges and general recommendations for change, very few attempts have been made to study how human rights reform happens. Yet, considering the ever growing implementation gap between international standards and national practice, this project saw the importance of starting this conversation. Methodology The project was based on a systemic approach with a view to creating sustainable change in the area of the rights of suspected and accused persons (see below, § 2.1.1). Its methodology built on tools and instruments from strategic development and consulting (such as the ‘’Change Formula” see more below, § 2.1.2), change management and ‘Theory of Change’ approaches (see below, § 2.1.3).6 These 6. The application of the principles of the systemic approach in enhancing the implementation of human rights were already discussed in previous projects of the Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Fundamental and Human Rights, namely the EU Project ‘Strengthening the effective implementation and follow-up of recommendations by torture monitoring bodies in the European Union’ (2014-2015) <https://gmr.lbg. ac.at/completed-projects-since-2004/eu-strengthening-the-effective-implementation-and-follow-up-of-recommendations-by-torturemonitoring-bodies-in-the-european-union/?lang=en>; and the EU Project ‘Improving Judicial Cooperation Across the EU Through Harmonised Detention Standards – The Role of National Preventive Mechanisms’ (2019-2021) <https://gmr.lbg.ac.at/completedprojects-since-2004/improving-judicial-cooperation-across-the-eu-through-harmonised-detention-standards-the-role-of-nationalpreventive-mechanisms/?lang=en >, which, inter alia, resulted in the publication of Walter Suntinger and Moritz Birk, ‘Systemic Thinking in Preventive Human Rights Monitoring: A Dossier for National Preventive Mechanisms‘ (Ludwig Boltzmann Institute of Fundamental and Human Rights 2021) <https://gmr.lbg.ac.at/wp-content/uploads/sites/12/2021/05/dossier_-_systemic_thinking_-_lbi_gmr.pdf>. 7