inal-justice reform, promoting political awareness and encouraging structural changes in criminal-justice systems. In 2005, the ODIHR continued to advocate the transfer of power to authorize arrest from prosecutors to the judiciary. The ODIHR also continued to support the development of independent monitoring boards for places of detention and encouraged participating States to give early consideration to signing and ratifying the Optional Protocol to the Convention against Torture (OPCAT). Torture prevention is also being enhanced through the focal point on torture at the ODIHR. OSCE/CURTIS BUDDEN Democratization: Rule of Law Keynote speaker Sir Sydney Transfer of judicial authorization of arrest OPCAT and detention monitoring to the judiciary In 2005, the ODIHR worked closely with NGOs and governmental partners to discuss ratification of the OPCAT. One aspect of the OPCAT that could be a powerful torture-prevention tool is the monitoring mechanism: the OPCAT provides for a worldwide monitoring body and constantly working independent and transparent national mechanisms. The ODIHR provides assistance in the development of independent national monitoring mechanisms. In 2005, this assistance included activities in Armenia and Kazakhstan. The ODIHR supported the Armenian Monitoring Board in the development of regular and institutionalized monitoring of places of detention by civil society. The ODIHR translated the manual Monitoring Places of Detention: A Practical Guide for NGOs into Armenian to support the training and capacity-building activities of the Armenian Monitoring Board. In Kazakhstan, the ODIHR followed up the adoption of the law that allowed public monitoring of places of detention in 2004 by working with other partners, such as Penal Reform International, to assist Kazakh authorities with official regulations on the creation and functioning of monitoring boards. The ODIHR is also closely following ongoing discussions on the establishment of monitoring boards in Kyrgyzstan. Most ill-treatment and torture take place against people held in custody. International human rights standards and OSCE commitments require that the decision on whether someone is to be held in custody be made by an independent judge. This is done through a procedure known as habeas corpus. The integration of this procedure into legislation puts both the defence and prosecution on a more equal footing when arguing their points before the court in an adversarial setting, as the prosecutor does not have the immediate advantage of deciding if a defendant remains in custody. To date, prosecutors in six countries in the OSCE region retain the authority to place a person into custody: Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan. At present, discussions on the transfer of powers of arrest from the prosecutor’s office to the judiciary are prominent on the agenda in some countries of Central Asia. The ODIHR provides legislative advice and sharing of experience and expertise on how to implement this reform. In this context, the ODIHR, jointly with the parliament of Kazakhstan, held a conference in June on the transfer of powers of arrest from the prosecutor’s office to the judiciary. ANNUAL REPORT 2005 Kentridge QC (left) with Ambassador Christian Strohal, at a meeting on the role of defence lawyers in guaranteeing a fair trial, Tbilisi, 3 November. 25