most impactful and dividing roles among change agents to most effectively reach results. For that purpose it was recommended to provide an explicit introduction to the Theory of Change process at future workshops and ensure a professional facilitation. Moreover, it should be considered to strengthen the capacities of actors involved in developing, implementing, and evaluating a Theory of Change in change projects for the future. Thus, it would also be very important that the EU and other key funders increase funding opportunities with an explicit change perspective and the aim to strengthen systemic and participatory strategy development. This includes empowering and (also financially) enabling the competent CSOs to follow up on their projects and develop stable and sustainable longterm strategies to strengthen procedural rights. 2.2 Gaining a holistic understanding of the problem and why it persists Every sound change strategy must be based on a thorough understanding of the problem, which includes different levels. In order to know where we want to go and how, we have to know where we currently are. This also allows us to base our future actions on evidence and enhance our credibility as change agents. Despite the broad research already conducted in other projects, it was commonly acknowledged that we, as CSOs working towards the protection of suspected and accused persons in police custody, need to have a clearer understanding of the broader structure in which our projects intend to achieve change. For projects to be better anchored in context, and therefore produce better concrete results, the starting point is to identify the needs of people impacted by policing and understand how the effective implementation of procedural rights can strengthen their position and answer their needs. It is important to have a clear understanding of who is taken into police custody, what is their profile, and what are their needs in practice. We also need to understand how individual rights fit into the broader criminal justice system and incorporate a structural analysis to our work. Our human rights analysis should go beyond the ‘evident rights’ (right to liberty, fair trial, and prohibition of torture) and include the broader human rights impact and positive obligations, including economic, social, and cultural rights. For example, it is relevant to ask if individual procedural rights can achieve the aim of restoring the balance of power in police custody and contribute to fairer and more equal justice systems. This requires us, first, to take account of the broader structural issues at play in policing, starting with the mandate given to police authorities (stop and search, racial profiling, use of coercive powers including violence, use of technological tools) and lack of effective oversight mechanisms.40 Second, we need to take into account the needs of those most affected by policing. These reflections are necessary to understand if and how procedural rights can help to re-balance powers in practice and how they fit into broader criminal justice and policing reform, which again, requires close collaboration consultation with the stakeholders involved. It is further important to take a close look at why the problem persists, what structural/systemic deficits exist, and what the root causes are. In line with a systemic approach, it is crucial to go beyond a classical legal analysis that focuses on laws or procedures, but also understand the less visible or invisible aspects of the problem such as psychological or sociological 40. e.g. European Parliament, ‘Democratic Oversight of the Police: Study requested by the LIBE Committee’ (Policy Department for Citizens’ Rights and Constitutional Affairs 2022); Ojeaku Nwabuzo, ‘The Sharp Edge of Violence: Police Brutality and Community Resistance of Racialised Groups’ (European Network Against Racism 2021) 19