The wide distribution of public reporting among all these diverse and interested groups serves the important function of providing a common foundation of objective information on the functioning of the criminal justice system to all stakeholders. Specifically, trial-monitoring reports provide a unique resource to support the reform process by: • • • Documenting practices, problems, and/or abuses within the system, thereby eliminating the need to rely on incomplete or anecdotal information; Educating all stakeholders on respective legal responsibilities and domestic and international standards, thereby increasing the accountability of local institutions and actors; and Providing a starting point to consider reform that is based upon a foundation of fact regarding the current functioning of the system and a direction for future reforms based upon international standards of criminal justice. OSCE trial-monitoring programmes have issued a wide range of public reports. While not all reports fit easily into a specific type, reports may generally be classified as one of three basic types: general reviews of the justice system, thematic reports, and reports focusing on specific crimes or prosecutions related to discrete crimes or events. The following sections provide a brief overview of each, as well as identify examples of specific types for further reference. 8.1.1 Comprehensive reports related to the functioning of the justice system Reports providing an overview of the functioning of the justice system make generally applicable findings in support of enhancing the effective and fair application of the law. Reports of this type usually focus on the application of local law and local practices, including an assessment of compliance with international fair-trial standards. While such reports may address the entirety of criminal proceedings, it is more often the case that reports will focus on the public stages of criminal proceedings as access and monitoring permit. Since the majority of OSCE trial-monitoring programmes have been organized with the express goal of improving the overall functioning of the criminal justice system, many programmes have issued such reports. The key to reports that make a systemic review is the monitoring of a broad range of case types in order to make generally applicable conclusions and recommendations to improve the functioning and fairness of the entire criminal justice system. While certain types of cases may be prioritized for monitoring, too narrow a selection of case types may compromise the ability to make generally applicable findings regarding the criminal justice system as a whole. For instance, monitoring only politically sensitive or complex cases to make systemic conclusions about the functioning of the judicial system may distort judicial practices where ordinary cases that make up more than 95 per cent of a court’s docket are not also monitored. This flaw in methodology will be evident to local actors where such reports are intended to lay a foundation for systemic reforms. Therefore, to provide a credible methodology, reports making findings on broad systemic practices in aid of overall reform should be based on a broad systemic approach to monitoring. 104 Trial-Monitoring: A Reference Manual for Practitioners