A/HRC/15/33 64. Basic costing for a witness protection program includes one-time expenses to set up the programme, such as for equipment and premises, relocation costs, staff salaries and other remunerations and benefits, travel expenses, allowances for witnesses and psychological assessments and counselling. Adequate and regular funding should be provided by state budgets to ensure the programme’s sustainability and the availability of resources for the duration of protection. In some cases, government budgets make fixed yearly allocations to their protection programmes. Special funds should be earmarked for emergency use, for example, an unforeseen increase in the number of witnesses entering the programme. At the regional level, the establishment of joint funds to help finance a witness protection programme and promote cross-broader cooperation could be considered.61 (ii) Training capacity 65. Although the witness protection mandate may be unified at the national level in one institution, many actors will continue to be involved in witness protection. Judges and prosecutors may not have adequate knowledge on how to handle vulnerable witnesses, or assistants (of judges and prosecutors) taking witnesses’ initial statements may also lack basic training. The witness protection agency should create a strong training and capacitybuilding unit to keep its staff abreast of developments in the field, but also to train those persons who come into contact with vulnerable witnesses. Such training activities could gradually be integrated into the curricula of national judicial training institutions and involve, among others, Bar Associations. V. Conclusion and recommendations 66. Witness protection should start long before a trial is conducted. In fact, measures taken during the first stages of investigation play a crucial role for the protection of witnesses. Failure to adopt effective measures to protect witnesses at the investigative stage and in prosecutorial arrangements, and thereby give them reason to trust that their safety will be ensured during the process, may result in many cases against perpetrators of human rights never reaching trial stage. 67. Traditionally, formal witness protection programmes have a mandate to ensure the preservation of evidence contained in witnesses’ statements or anticipated testimonies and to offer protection in order to facilitate witness participation in judicial proceedings. In the specific context of trials for human rights violations, witness protection needs to be understood differently. First of all, witnesses to human rights violations are frequently victims of the crimes to which they testify, rather than co-perpetrators or former associates of the accused perpetrators. Secondly, human rights crimes are perpetrated by State actors or individuals associated with State or State-like powers. In some cases, individuals who subsequently occupy State positions, such as rebel leaders or their associates, are alleged perpetrators. They are individuals who are or have been in a position of power and can exert considerable influence. As such, the witnesses testifying against them are particularly vulnerable. States therefore have additional obligations towards victims and witnesses in such cases, and traditional witness protection programmes are usually not designed to meet those particular needs. 68. Considerable development of policy, legal and programming aspects of protection of witnesses, victims and other persons involved in criminal proceedings 61 18 UNODC, Good Practices for the Protection of Witnesses in Criminal Proceedings Involving Organized Crimes, pp. 50–51. GE.10-15173