A/HRC/20/20 prosecutors and public defenders, where appointed. Capacity-building courses are usually monitored by judicial academies; evaluation is made by those who have received the training and the feedback aids in improving training courses. Capacitybuilding has the aim of broadening the knowledge of these actors while they discharge their functions in the judiciary, public prosecution or public defence offices. Monitoring of the knowledge effectively acquired through training courses should be improved and strengthened, and be performed by the respective institutions (judiciary, national councils, public prosecutors office and public defenders offices). 99. The replies to the questionnaire revealed the need for further assessment and dialogue between judicial academies and the institutions mentioned (judiciary, public prosecutors offices, public defenders offices, national councils, universities and bar associations) so as to allow compliance of decisions on international human rights training with the different professional needs. The knowledge acquired during training must fill existing knowledge gaps. This discussion should be encouraged among the institutions in order to obtain not only effective international human rights law training, but also effective monitoring of the training carried out, mainly in cases in which there is a plurality of interlocutors. 100. It is also important to coordinate the efforts of the sectors of the State that work on international human rights law capacity-building for actors of the judicial system, such as judicial academies, the judiciary, the Ministry of Justice, professional associations and non-governmental organizations, with a view to develop training and capacity-building programmes that will make for the proper and effective administration of justice. For this purpose, there is an urgent need to establish better communication links between these institutions, to identify the areas in the judicial system in need of capacity-building, and to develop adequate capacity-building programmes that will provide for those needs. 101. The Special Rapporteur notes that it is of utmost importance that mechanisms capable of measuring the results or effectiveness of international human rights law capacity-building programmes be developed. A judge specialized in family law should be able to discharge her or his functions in a court that corresponds to her or his competence. In addition, monitoring the use of knowledge acquired in examining domestic judicial decisions, resolutions, legal opinions or petitions is also a good tool to ensure that this knowledge is employed to the benefit of those who seek justice and resort to the justice system. The offer of capacity-building programmes implies a cost for the State, a cost that increases when knowledge is not used and applied in the way it was intended. In other words, the outcomes of capacity-building courses and activities should improve the promotion and protection of human rights at the domestic level. 102. The effectiveness of capacity-building programmes must be monitored in each one of these areas, both from an academic and practical perspective, so that knowledge may be applied to the judicial and legal services provided to society. 103. The questionnaire also revealed that international human rights law capacitybuilding for lawyers should be encouraged as part of States’ human rights policy in order to engage their professional (bar) associations, universities and, also, judicial academies to offer such training for lawyers. 104. The role of non-governmental organizations is particularly important in cases where the State or professional institutions dispose of few financial, human or technical resources (for instance, in cases where judicial academies are still in process of being created or developed). It has been observed that non-governmental organizations greatly contribute to the implementation of human rights capacity- 25