PARTICIPANTʼS PAPERMEASURES FOR SPEEDY AND EFFICIENT CRIMINAL TRIALS
Alvaro Luiz de Mattos StippI. INTRODUCTION
Bringing offenders to justice properly and swiftly have been complicated by the speed with which
goods,money and people move across international borders(hereinafter transnational crimes).In orderto improve criminal justice systems and practices regarding investigation, prosecution, adjudicationand enforcement properly in todayʼs fast-paced global environment,countries must strengthen international cooperation in criminal justice.
When it comes to combating transnational crime, police cooperation has stolen the limelight andseems to be considered the only area where mutual assistance in criminal matters has been providing
new answers.New specialized police units seem to be ofgreat popularitybetween head governors.This
study is concerned with measures for speedy and efficient criminal trials and also with solutions
concerned with addressing lack of democratic skills and disrespect of fundamental rights. To careabout fundamental rights and democracy is a role that should especially be played by public prosecutors.In SAVIGNYʼ
s words,public prosecutors are the watchmen of the law.In an attempt to shed somelight on the role of the public prosecutors and to outline their possible role in the field of mutual
assistance in criminal matters,this study scrutinizes the institutions of prosecution services in different
jurisdictions and examines transnational criminality.
A discussion of any branch of the criminal process could consider a wide variety of practical,
procedural or theoretical issues,but to discuss them all,although important,would be impossible in ashort work such this. The scope of this essay is restricted to the specific idea that public prosecutors
could be playing an important role in the international arena.The main thesis of the dissertation grewfrom an increasing realization that although in some jurisdictions the prosecutor has been a significant
figure behind some remarkable penal trends and protection of fundamental rights, he/she is thrown
overboard when it comes to international judicial criminal cooperation. Nevertheless,the paper does
not deal with the reasons of this situation. It calls our attention to the role increasingly played byprosecutors in administering criminal justice in their own jurisdictions and points out the lack of theirpresence in the international scenario.The recognition of the lack of such pivotal figures may,at least,pose some food for thought to those faced with steering international judicial cooperation in criminal
matters in a consistent direction in forthcoming years.
A. The Importance of the Topic
With the flourishing of global criminality,1 an international judicial response became increasingly
necessary to provide security and accountability.2 Governments have been seeking to solve the problem
by intensifying international judicial criminal cooperation (hereinafter IJCC).3 However,such judicial
cooperation may well be translated solely into international police cooperation,and we argue that thesuccess to combat transnational crime depends not only on its prevention and detection but also rightly

Federal Circuit Prosecutor in Sao Paulo, Brazil.
1The United Nations and Crime Prevention, ISBN 921-130177-7, UN Publications and also, Stop Crime ― The United

Nations vs. Transnational Crime, at http://www.un.org/ecosocdev/geninfo/crime/dpi1644e.htm>.
2M ARTIN & ROM ANO showed that it will require enormous effort to study these activities in all their economic,
political, and cultural aspects, since they are not individual acts,but part of a ʻhighly complicated, well-organized systemthat functions very much like a modern international business corporationʼ
. M ARTIN, J.M . and ROMANO, A.T. (1992)
Multinational Crime:Terrorism,Espionage,Drug & Arms Trafficking.Studies in Crime,Law and Justice,v.9,Newbury
Park:SAGE, pp.1-27.

69

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
on interrelationships between States to prosecute and punish international offenders. That is to saythat the assumption of IJCC solemnly as synonymous with police cooperation maybe assisting criminal
law-breakers or ʻ
Big Brotherʼagencies, exacerbating the problems of law enforcement, national andinternational order and civil liberties.4 The question of how the international community should
respond to the threat of transnational crime,and whether that response would be effective,is therefore,
critical.
B. Some Necessary Explanations
1. Global Village5
It has been repeated to exhaustion that with advances in technology and the ease of global travel,
the world has become, in many ways, a global village.6 This has a dramatic impact on many aspectsof life and society,and law enforcement is no exception.7 Whereas,the recent developments concerning
the Internet have sped up the inclusion of a shrinking world,provoking economic and social changes,
as well new criminal opportunities, in seeking to avoid confusion with other definitions in which
globalization is applied, the expression ʻ
global villageʼbetter translates our purposes.
2. Prosecutorial Services
For the purposes of clarity, public prosecutor (hereinafter PP)means any lawyer who is or has at
any time been appointed by or on behalf of the State or other public authority to prosecute criminal
offences or has been elected for that purpose and includes lawyers who have been retained by aprosecutor so appointed or elected to conduct or assist in the conduct of criminal prosecutions and also
includes examining magistrates.8 Under these circumstances,prosecution service or public prosecution
is used herein as a generic designation of the institutions that have the incumbency to prosecute on
behalf of the State. These institutions are very different in each Nation-State and they modify along
space and time throughout their existence.9 The expression Public M inistry will be employed only tostress those differences referring to prosecutorial services of inquisitorial origin, that have a strong
tradition of public prosecution in contrast to others with a long tradition of private prosecution.These
two groups have developed and changed over the years leading to, as we will try to elucidate, aconvergence towards an independent public service with space for subsidiary private participation.10
The PS is a necessary element within the domestic criminal procedure to secure the impartiality of thejudge and to avoid the eventual bias of the police. It plays an important role in the administration of

3Criminal procedure, more than any other discipline, resists harmonization because it is essentially linked to State

sovereignty. Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters is not a new subject, but the idea of international judicial cooperation has been seen as the natural solution to face the non-existence of an effective international criminal jurisdiction
system and the increase of perpetration of international and transnational crimes.
4Vide EDWARD SNOWDENʼ
s recent revelations on US National Security Agency ― NSA.
5The expression ʻ
global villageʼwas chosen instead of the fashionable expression ʻ
globalizationʼ. The latter has been
defined in various forms and in manifold contexts,usually meaning the concrete connections among different locales butwith a strong connotation ofhierarchical bias as a consequence ofthe neo-liberal police translated in a language ofpower.
On the other hand, global village has a very precise meaning, which was given by the Canadian author M ARSHALL
M CLUHAN.It deals with the theory of communication and has not much to do with political concepts or a hierarchicalidea;on the contrary,the idea is one of co-ordination (interdependence).The expression was carved to synthesize the lastchanges in the world made by the technological developments in communications.
ʻ
Globalization is about power and control;about the reshaping of the world into one without borders ruled by a dictatorshipof the worldʼ
s most powerful central banks, commercial banks and multinational companies. It is an attempt to undo a
century of social progress and to alter the distribution of income from inequitable to inhumanʼ. PAUL HELLYER (1997).
Other interesting quotes on globalization:
http://www.oneworld.org/guides/globalisation/globalisation quotes.htm>.
6PROST, K. (1997). Breaking Down the Barriers: International Cooperation in Combating Transnational Crime. Paper
presented at the Second Annual Conference and General M eeting of the IAP ― IAP, held from 2 to 6 September 1997,
in Ottawa, Canada.
7Ibidem.
8In accordance to the definition of ʻ
prosecutorʼgiven by the International Association of Prosecutors ― IAPʼs Constitution in its article 1.1., excluding the examining magistrate which we deem a hybrid figure that expresses confusion
between judiciary power and PS, in opposition to the necessity of independence of these institutions.
9 See heading number 3 below.
10 As it is the case of Brazil with the subsidiary criminal prosecution, CF, art.5, LIX:private prosecution against publicoffenses shall be admitted if public prosecution is not filed within the period established by law.

70

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPERjustice.
3. Transnational Crime
Transnational crime is the problem focused upon in this work;thus it is crucial to scrutinize how
it has been handled so far. Although one can classify international, transnational and multinational
crimes, these expressions will be used interchangeably and in opposition to ʻ
domestic crime.ʼAs aconsequence,ʻtransnational crimeʼrefers to the criminality that operates in more than one country or,
although it may happen within only one jurisdiction,it is of concern of the international community.11
For this reason, transnational crime could be defined as an act that breaches the law beyond one
Nation-State jurisdiction or as an offence that operates beyond the legal reach of one Nation-State
alone.The expression ʻ
cosmopolitan crimeʼwould be etymologically proper but it sounds pedantic andcommentators and high authorities around the world have already selected the expressions ʻtransnationalʼ,ʻinternationalʼand ʻ
organized crimesʼ
.12 Finally, for the purposes of this paper, we assume
IJCC as a conditio sine qua non to combat international criminality by speeding up and making more
efficient criminal trials.

II. JURISDICTION AND SOVEREIGNTY
Criminal procedure is, for sovereign nations, a matter of power. Nevertheless, the sprouting of
global crime imposes upon governments the need to solve the problem of criminality that goes beyond
the Nation-State jurisdiction. These are issues of public interest though the principle of state sovereignty impedes the proper response to watch over the general interests of society. Legal and judicial
response to this internationalization of criminal activities has not yet reached a state of real andcomplete adequacy. Incrimination and sentencing remain a privilege of national sovereignty13 andjurisdiction is usually confined to criminal acts committed within the boundaries of a country.14
The prohibition to take the law into oneʼs own hands is a conquest of modern criminal law and alsoa guarantee of the fundamental rights of citizens.15 The jus puniendi belongs to the State,16 whichmeans that only the State is allowed and has the right to punish individuals.17 Not only the right tocastigate,but also,and above all,the duty to punish criminal offenders.18 The State has the right andthe duty to defend society from any person that threatens its tranquility and commits breaches of thesocial intercourse.19 Otherwise it would be a question of private retaliation.20 When an offence iscommitted, the State suffers indirectly the lesion besides the injury suffered directly by the victim.21
The State is able to prosecute and punish individuals that committed what is considered an offence
under its laws and within its jurisdiction.22 The jus puniendi is suitable for the State as an expressionof its sovereignty.23 To enforce this essential security role, each State has its own police, which arecharacterized by the monopoly of the use of force within its territory.24 Therefore,to provide security
for its citizens is a basic function of the State, usually visualized25 as the police ― although only the
11 This includes cases such as General Pinochet,the atrocities held in former Yugoslavia and Rwanda;the attack to thetwin towers;crimes laid down by the Rome Statute, etc.
12 Compendium of United Nations Standards and Norms in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice［hereinafter Compendium］, New York:United Nations, p.32 ff., Also M ARTIN & ROMANO, op.cit., pp.1-27.
13 BOSSARD, A. (1988)Interpol and Law Enforcement: Response to Transnational Crime, 11 Police Studies, p.177.
14 Ibidem.
15 GRECCO FILHO, V. (1991)Manual de Processo Penal［Criminal Procedure M anual］, Sao Paulo:Saraiva, p. 50.
16 FREDERICO MARQUES, J. (1997) Elementos de Direito Processual Penal［Elements of Criminal Procedure Law］,
Campinas:Bookseller,v.1,pp.23-24;MIRABETE,J.F.(1997)Processo Penal［Criminal Procedure］,Sao Paulo:Atlas,pp.
23-25.
17 Ibidem;TOURINHO FILHO, F.C. (1989)Processo Penal, v.2, pp. 1113 and GRECCO FILHO, op.cit., p. 50.
18 ALM EIDA,C.M.(1973)Princı
pios Fundamentais do Processo Penal［Fundamental Principles of Criminal Procedure］,
Sao Paulo:RT, 86-87.
19 TOURINHO FILHO, op.cit., p. 11.
20 GRECCO FILHO, op.cit., p. 51;FREDERICO M ARQUES, op.cit., pp.2324;M IRABETE, op.cit., pp. 23-25.
21 TOURINHO FILHO, op.cit., p.11
22 Ibidem.
23 This is not an unlimited right. It finds its limitation on the pulla poena, nullum crimen sine praevia lege principle.
24 BAYLEY,D.H.(1985)Patterns of Policing:A Comparative International Analysis,New Brunswick:Rutgers UP,p.7.
25 JONES, T., (1995). Policing and Democracy in Netherlands. Police Studies Institute, p. 1.

71

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
State-Justice has the power to inflict the sanction juris ―,and this may be the reason that international
police cooperation had been taken as synonymous of international judicial criminal cooperation.
Indeed,the police are the key public service in the modern state,performing ʻ
the quintessential functionof government, namely, authoritative and forceful regulationʼ
.26 And because the police are the mostvisible representation of social authority,they have to have a unique relationship with the institutionsof democracy and their legitimacy.27
On the one hand,transnational criminality remains a domestic threat without domestic answers.On
the other hand, transnational policing means policing beyond sovereign frontiers and it is, bydefinition,28 impossible.If contemporary concepts are applied,the use of force and special powers areallowed exclusively within one Stateʼ
s jurisdiction. Historically, the dual concepts of national sovereignty and exclusive State jurisdiction over criminal law matters have played a crucial role in thedevelopment of modern criminal justice systems.29 In spite of all this,the most significant difference inmany if not most of these new manifestations of transnational crime is really the ease with which they
can avoid or circumvent national control efforts. They are perhaps invincible as long as individualStates do not learn to work together.30 Under those circumstances, the necessity of judicial criminal
cooperation between jurisdictions involved in a transnational crime may be obvious.

III. PROSECUTION SERVICES AROUND THE WORLD
From the historical background one may conclude prosecutorial services around the world developed diffusely and in accordance with cultural patterns responding to historical trends.They are stilldeveloping and also being created heterogeneously.For this reason,and because PPs playa crucial rolein the administration of criminal justice,31 the United Nations (UN), among the other forty-four
Resolutions adopted at the Eighth Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of
Offenders,held in Havana,Cuba,in 1990,adopted guidelines on the role of prosecutors.32 The standardsetting instruments fit three main categories: human rights in the administration of justice; model
treaties on cooperation;and statements on crime prevention.33 The Guidelines34 are included in the firstmain category35 and view the role of the prosecutors as crucial in furthering the principles of equality
before the law, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a fair and public hearing by anindependent and impartial tribunal.36 Those selected as prosecutors must be individuals ofintegrityand
ability, with appropriate qualifications and training.37 Accordingly, the Guidelines address qualifications and training;38 status and condition of service;39 freedom of expression and association;40 the roleof prosecutors in criminal proceedings;41 the need for rules and regulations to guide the exercise of thediscretionary functions of prosecutors;42 alternatives to prosecution;43 relations with other government
26 BAYLEY, op.cit., p.20.
27 JONES, T. (1995). Policing and Democracy in Netherlands. Police Studies Institute, p.1.
28 BAYLEY, op.cit., p20.
29 TKACHUK, B. & DANDURAND, Y. (1998) Recent International Efforts to Address Transnational Crime, Paper

presented at the International Conference on Crime and Criminal Justice in a Borderless Era, Ritsumeican University,
Kyoto, Japan, p.2.
30 Ibidem.
31 Promoting fair,effective,impartial and efficient prosecution of criminal offences and the promotion of high standards
and principles in the administration of criminal justice ― Article 2.3 of IAPʼs Constitution.
32 Report prepared by the Secretariat, UN Doc.A/CONF.144/28 (1990), at 188.
33 CLARK, R.S. (1994). The United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Program:Formulation of Standards
and Efforts at Their Implementation, v.20, Procedural Aspects of International Law Series. University of Pennsylvania
Press, Philadelphia. p.117.
34 UN Doc.A/CONF.144/28 (1990).
35 CLARK, op.cit., p.117118.
36 Preamble of the Report. Supra n.19 .
37 Para. 1. UN Guidelines, in Compendium, p.165, ff. (Supra n.15).
38 Ibidem para.12.
39 Ibidem para.37.
40 Ibidem para.89.
41 Ibidem para.1016. For example, prosecutors must ［p］
ʻ rotect the public interest, act with objectivity, take properaccount of the position of the suspect and the victim, and pay attention to all relevant circumstances, irrespective ofwhether they are to the advantage or disadvantage of the suspect.ʼ
［Para.13 (b)］.

72

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPERagencies or institutions;44 disciplinary proceedings;45 and the obligation on the part of prosecutors to
observe the guidelines46 and to report violations to their superiors.47
In the same direction, in June 1995 at the United Nationsʼoffices in Vienna, the International
Association of Prosecutors (IAP) was established,48 being formally inaugurated in September 1996,at its
first General M eeting in Budapest.49 It is a young association that has already produced very goodresults. Its preoccupations with qualifications and training;conditions of service;freedom of expression;the role of prosecutors in criminal proceedings;and especially,regulations to guide the exerciseof the discretionary functions of prosecutors, are expressed in its Constitution50 and throughout its
conferences51 and work,52 and reflects the Guideline in the Role of the Prosecutors and the UN
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and other subsequent international instruments.
Although the idea of harmonizing and standardizing the role of the PP around the world may soundinteresting, each national jurisdiction has a very particular PS. One may say they could be classified
in as many prosecution families as there are PS around the globe; this is because of the different
national constitutions and juridical systems;administration divisions;peculiarities of each criminal
procedure;historical events;political, economic, social and cultural circumstances and traditions ofeach country.
Some countries are divided into states or provinces and have different criminal procedures and PS.
For example, Australia has six states and two territories, each state has its own director of publicprosecutions whose responsibility is for ʻ
domesticʼoffences;for example the sale of drugs within thatparticular State.53 There is,in addition,one Federal (Commonwealth)Director of Public Prosecutions,who has an Office in each State. The responsibility of the Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions is in relation to breaches of Federal law,for example,the importation of drugs into Australia.54
Broadly speaking,one may say the same occurs with Brazil,55 Canada,56 Germany;57 Switzerland;58 theUSA,59 among others.However,in the Russian Federation the PPs constitute a unified federal centralized system of bodies and institutions and act on the basis of subordination of lower prosecutors to
42 Ibidem para.17.
43 Ibidem para.1819.
44 Ibidem para.20.
45 Ibidem para.2122.
46 Ibidem para.23.
47 Ibidem para.24.
48 It is important to note that police have had international associations for a long time.
49 IAP (1998)International Association of Prosecutors:an Introduction. Internal publication of the IAP, p.2.
50 Particularly in Article 2.3 of the Constitution of the IAP, Internal publication (1998), which establishes the objectivesof the IAP.
51 After the inaugural Conference in Budapest in 1996,Annual Conferences were held in Toronto (1997);Dublin (1998)andthe Fourth Annual Conference was held in Beijing (September 1999).
52 On 23 April 1999 the IAP adopted its Standards of Professional Responsibility and Statement of the Essential Duties andRights of Prosecutors［hereinafter Standards］. It has also prepared the Directory of Prosecution Services［hereinafter
Directory］, in accordance with its Constitution, particularly Article 2.3 (Supra p.15).
53 Directory, p.1.
54 Ibidem.
55 One Federal Prosecution Service and twentyfour stateʼs PS. Ibidem, p.45.
56 Canada functions under a Federal and Provincial system. There is an Attorney General of Canada at the Federal level
and Attorneys General for each of the 10 Provinces. Ibidem, p.50.
57 Within the Lander, the prosecutorʼ
s office is hierarchically organized from the ʻprosecutor generalʼ,who acts directly
under the authority of the minister.At the federal level there is the federal prosecutorʼ
s office competent only for casesof subversive activities (Staatsschytzdelikte, 120,142a GVG).Ibidem,p.101,and also VAN DEN VYNGAERT,VAN DENWYNGAERT, C. (1993) Criminal Procedures Systems in the European Community, London:Butterworth & Co. (Publishers)Ltd., p.141.
58 Directory,p.195.The Swiss criminal prosecution system is very complex.Switzerland consists of twentysix constituent
states or cantons, each having separate prosecution systems. Only a fraction of offences are subject to federal prosecution. Thus there are twenty-seven prosecuting systems differing to such an extent that anyattempt to delineate the justiceand prosecution system as a whole would deserve a unique dissertation.
59 Directory, p. 206. Prosecuting agencies in the US exist at the local, state, and federal level, and prosecutorsʼduties,functions,and powers vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. America hosts no fewer than fifty-one distinct governments:73

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
superior ones and the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.60 The system of the Prosecutorial
bodies is comprised of the Prosecutor Generalʼs Office,Prosecutorʼs Offices of republics,territories andregions, of M oscow and St. Petersburg (89), specialized prosecutorʼ
s offices (for transport and forprotection of environment) (19), prosecutorʼ
s offices in cities and towns.61 The bodies of militaryprosecution headed by the Chief Military Prosecutorʼs Office are also included in the system and theChief M ilitary Prosecutorʼs Office is regarded as part of the Prosecutor Generalʼs Office.62
Other peculiarities, for instance the way in which the prosecutors are chosen for the job, can also
be the core of a study.They can be elected,appointed,nominated or selected on the basis of exams.63
The division of work also makes distinctions between prosecution bodies.In England and Wales there
are bodies other than the Crown Prosecution Service(CPS)in charge of prosecutions ofcrimes(Serious
Fraud Office (SFO);64 HM Customs and Excise;65 and other Government departments).66 In France,
administrative authorities may, within their own sphere of competence,initiate criminal proceedings.
Examples are the Water Supplies and Forests,the Customs Service,Posts and Telecommunications.67
These agencies may act alone or in conjunction with the PP in accordance with complex rules which
are to a certain extent the product of history.68 On the other hand,there are countries where the PS isan exclusively legitimate body to prosecute a criminal offender.
The quantity of citizens under a certain jurisdiction or the ratio between the number of prosecutors
and the number of citizens and its contrast with other jurisdictions can also be a relevant form of study
and help to improve PS work. There is an almost infinite variety of forms one could classify the PS
existent around the world and as a consequence one may conclude: It is impossible to establish astandard model of PS. Nevertheless, better understanding among different prosecutorial services anddifferent criminal procedure systems around the world can be reached if minimum standards ofprosecution are respected.
A. Relationship between Prosecution Services and the Local GovernmentStates shall ensure that prosecutors are able to perform their professional functions without
intimidation, hindrance, harassment, improper interference or unjustified exposure to civil, penal orother liability.69 The use of prosecutorial discretion,70 when permitted in a particular jurisdiction,
should be exercised independently and be free from political interference.71
If non-prosecutorial authorities have the right to give general or specific instructions to prosecutors,
such instructions should be transparent;consistent with lawful authority and subject to establishedguidelines to safeguard the actuality and the perception ofprosecutorial independence.72 When it comesto international relations such authorities have an enormous influence.In order to ensure that prosecutors are able to carry out their professional responsibilities independently, in article 6 of the IAPʼs
Standards, a set of measures deals with the PPʼs empowerment,ranging from professional functions73
the national or federal government, and the governments of each of the fifty states. Recognized as distinct sovereigns,
each state has the power to establish its own government,to pass its own laws,and to regulate matters of local concern
within its territorial limits. The American system represents an adaptation of the English Common Law to Americaʼsspecial needs. While the towns,cities,counties,states,and nation all have their own criminal justice systems,all of them
operate somewhat alike. No two of them, however, operate precisely alike.
60 Directory, p.176.
61 Ibidem.
62 Ibidem.
63 The selection criteria for prosecutors shall embody safeguards against appointments based on partiality or prejudice,excluding any discrimination. UNʼs Guidelines, para.2 (a).
64 Ibidem, p.88.
65 Ibidem, p.83.
66 Supra n.129.
67 VAN DEN WYNGAERT, op.cit., p.112.
68 Ibidem.
69 UNʼ
s Guidelines para. 4.
70 Prosecutorial discretion is an important issue that has gained commentatorsʼ
attention.
71 Standards, para.2.1, see also para.6.
72 Ibidem, para. 2.2.
73 Article 6(a).

74

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPERto personal and family physical protection, when their safety is threatened as a result of the proper
discharge of their prosecutorial functions.74
Independence from the local government is a variable that may give the idea of democratic andnon-democratic governments according to the greater or lesser control the executive authorities
exercise over PS.Although,many Western democracies are in the group of partially dependent or evenin the dependent group. It seems it happens by tradition and to enforce accountability;however it issaid this control is not used to interfere with the administration of justice. Nevertheless, it gives theexecutive power some control over PS.
From a brief study of the Directory of Prosecution Services one may conclude that even PS in
Western democracies still lack more independence from local governments. Eastern European countries present almost the same percentage of independent, partially independent and totally dependent
countries, maybe because of the reforms and their efforts to integrate within the EU in the future.
Figure 1

Figure 2

While in American countries the PS are more independent from local governments, and Nordic
countries consider this independence fundamental,in Far-East countries the tradition is of dependency.
Figure 3

Figure 4

Since the few African countries analysed do not present a tendency for the continent,a balance isreached and the total of PS studied reflected the same ratio as Western Europe:Half of the countries
with PS independent from local government and the other half divided by dependent and partiallyindependent relations (figs. 5 and 6).

74 Article 6(i).

75

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
Figure 5

Figure 6

Other relations must be established in order to study the authorities responsible for implementing
international mutual assistance in criminal matters.
B. The Role of the Prosecutor in the Investigative Process
The prosecutorial role in the investigative process is very controversial. Nevertheless, the UN
Guidelines recognize that the office of prosecutors shall be strictly separated from judicial functions75
and prosecutors shall perform an active role in criminal proceedings,including institution of prosecution and, where authorized by law or consistent with local practice, in the investigation of crime,76
supervision over the legality of these investigations and the exercise of other functions as representatives of the public interest.77
In spite of the existence of those who argue in favour of total independence between prosecutorialservices and the police,78 from the study it seems that this pure independence does not exist.The police
work will be addressed to the PS and even being independent they are interdependent.79 For instance,
the CPS has no control over the internal management of the police,80 nor over the way in which its
functions are performed. Nevertheless, cooperation between the police and the CPS is crucial to theeffective working of the criminal justice system,and a number of structural links have been developed,
including joint training and performance management programmes81 and even CPS lawyers in police
stations in an advisory capacity.82 The CPS has the statutory duty to advise the police on the relevance,
weight and admissibility of the evidence gathered.83 They cannot compel the police to follow advice;
however, once advised, the responsibility for any flaw will end up with the police. It is interesting tonote that in other agencies like HM Customs and Excise and the SFO,lawyers play a different role in
the investigation of a crime. The first operates in a task force model:a tripartite structure deciding
whether the case should be prosecuted.84 The second carries out investigations and each investigationis under the control of an SFO lawyer,who maygive advice and instructions to the police.85 Thus,when
it is not of primary public interest,but of secondary public interest,86 or when it is related to so-called

75 Guidelines, para.10.
76 Ibidem, para.11.
77 Ibidem.
78 The Royal Commission on Criminal Procedure and also by the JUSTICE Report, pointed it out: the decision toprosecute should rely on a distinct body other than the police (It is difficult for investigators to achieve the necessary
detachment and unfair to expect them to do so). In contrast to the idea of total independence,both reports mention the
Northern Irelandʼ
s Procurator Fiscal as example to be adopted.
79 Directory, p.74.
80 In some countries there is explicit external control, for example in Brazil, CF, art.129, VII, it is the duty of theprosecutor to exercise external control over police activities, according to the supplemental law.
81 Ibidem.
82 BALDWIN, J. & HUNT, A. (1998)Prosecutors Advising in Police Stations, Criminal Law Review, pp.52136.
83 Directory, p.74.
84 Ibidem, p.84.
85 Ibidem, p.88.
86 M AZZILLI,H.N.(1996).Regime Jurı
dico do Minsterio Publico［ Juridical Regime of the Public Ministry］. Sao Paulo:
Saraiva, p.30, for the distinction.

76

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPERserious crimes,87 the role of prosecutors in the investigative process changes. In the same way, it canbe argued that to combat transnational criminality, prosecutors should have at least supervisory
powers of investigation.
However,under those circumstances,the classification used in this study does not have a group of
total independence ― there is no such case of PS playing no role in the investigative process.The task
force group was also excluded from the classification. It is a way of investigating born in the USA (seebelow), which creates one equipe for a specific task, sometimes including a prosecutor at its fulcrum,
but it has a hierarchical structure that does not fit international cooperation.From the study,one may
conclude that very few PS have an advisory role. In Western democracies the PS are practicallydivided into two roles,investigative and supervisory.The high number of PS with investigative power
is a direct consequence of the quantity of inquisitorial systems in Western Europe. The Nordic
countries are all supervisory. Eastern European countries present the same tendency (most of themwere influenced by Franceʼ
s system).
Figure 7

Figure 8

The same can be said in relation to Far East countries;some countries were not only influenced by
France but also by Germany.88 In American countries,the PS are more supervisory of the investigative
process, even though these countries are equally divided between inquisitorial and accusatorial
backgrounds.
Figure 9

Figure 10

In America (fig 9)and Africa (fig. 11), it seems the supervisory role of PS is preferred, exceptingSouth Africa and Canada. Actually,the British ex-colonial countries are the ones that keep the groupof advice alive. The most recent countries seem to adopt the supervisory role of the PS in relation to
the investigative process.

87 As if not all the crimes were serious.
88 IIZUKA, K. (1996) The Criminal Justice System in Japan:Prosecution, Conference Paper, HEUNI, p.3. The code of

Criminal Procedure, under the Meiji Constitution, was enacted in 1890 under both French and German influence.

77

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
Eastern Europe (fig. 8)and the Far East (fig. 10)are the places where PS have more power in theinvestigative process.The total global result reflects a division between investigative and supervisory
roles.
Figure 11

Figure 12

An independent PS with some investigative powers is a tendency89 which is reflected in theInternational Criminal Court (ICC),90 and in the PS of the International Criminal Tribunals for theFormer Yugoslavia91 and Rwanda.92 It has the power to initiate investigations of any crime which took
place within the tribunalsʼjurisdiction on his or her initiative,and present indictments to the tribunals
for approval, without any selection or prior interference by the Security Council or States;however,States are free to seek judicial review of court orders.Nevertheless,it is provided by the Rome Statutethat an investigation or prosecution may stop or not begin for twelve months if the Security Council,
in resolution adopted under Chapter VII of the Charter of the UN, requests the Court to that effect,93
notwithstanding there should not be legitimate grounds to obstruct justice.
C. Positional Value Argument
Penal prosecution starts with the investigation of a fact ― a criminal fact ― and ends with thejudicial powerʼ
s final decision. It includes not only trial but also pre-trial stages. The connection ofthese two phases is made by the PP,and in some jurisdictions he/she will still have an important rolesupervising the application of the sanction.94 This strategic position of PS is true in any criminal
procedure system.Common law criminal procedure and evidence is often criticized on the ground thatit does not set out to discover the truth.95 Instead it arranges a contest between the prosecution and thedefence in which the judge acts like an umpire.96 In inquisitorial systems the judge appears to be trying
to get at the truth whereas,in common law systems he remains aloof from the contest,seeing that therules are kept and summing up the evidence impartially to the jury who make the decision.97 It is said
that, “it is true that procedure does not set out to discover whether the defendant ʻ
did itʼbut whether
it is proved beyond reasonable doubt he did it.”98 Therefore,criminal prosecution is about reconstructing the facts to discover the truth ― inquisitorial systems ― or just to prove the defendant should beheld accountable for them (he ʻ
did itʼ)― common law systems.
Focusing on reconstructing the criminal facts,one may think about representation or language lato
89 International community and ONGs, including the Human Rights Organizations, such as International Amnesty,

Human Rights Watch, claim for an independent PS working in these Tribunals.
90 Rome Statute, 17 July 1998, Doc.A/CONF.183/9 establishes the ICC, available at http://www.un.org/icc>. Article 15.
“The prosecutor may initiate investigations proprio motu on the basis of information on crimes within the jurisdiction of
the Court. See also Article 53.
91 ICT for Crimes committed in Former Yugoslavia, http://www.un.org/icty/>.
92 ICT of Rwanda, http://www.un.org/ictr/>and http://icc.amnesty.it/en/icc/crimes/ruanda.html>.
93 Article 16, Rome Statute.
94 M ost RomanoGermanic criminal systems.
95 SM ITH, J. (1995)Criminal Evidence, London:Sweet & Maxwell, p.12.
96 Ibidem.
97 Ibidem.
98 Ibidem.

78

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPERsensu.99
ʻEach law in fact constitutes a system:it has a vocabulary used to express concepts;its rules
are arranged into categories,it has techniques for expressing rules and interpreting them,it islinked to a view of the social order itself which determines the way in which the law is applied
100
and shapes the very function of law in that society.ʼ
DAVID and BRIERLEYʼ
s statement is equivalent to saying each law in fact constitutes a ʻlanguageʼ.
If one interprets the application of law to a concrete case as an exercise of language representation,101
it will be easy to understand that the pre-trial phase of the penal prosecution works within the realworld gathering evidence and preparing the ʻ
language elementsʼto represent the criminal occurrence
before a competent judicial authority.This moment of representation ― the trial ― has its own rules,
which integrate the language chosen to represent the real event in the juridical world.
This appropriate (competent)representation is necessary and,as in any language,has to follow all
the rules and formalities to be authoritative. It is not enough if the facts were represented in otherlanguage,in the TV or cinema for instance.It does not matter how close to reality they represent thecriminal event; there will be no legal output. Thus, in the juridical world the rules are clear andlawyers,judges,commentators,prosecutors,scholars,etc.have to use the juridical language elements
and relations correctly.102

If one represents these two worlds in mathematical sets,the elements (pieces of evidence)in the realworld set will have to be represented in the other set by a bi-univocal function.That is where the PP
works.He is the bridge,or the function,between the real world and its legal representation.If someone
makes up evidence this bi-univocal representation is broken.The same occurs if for anyreason the jury
or judge misinterpret the representation or if the PP does not establish a bi-univocal function.

99 One can interpret law (droit)as a language taking into consideration the Semiotic as Charles Sanders Peirce developedin his Collected Papers
100 DAVID,R.& BRIERLEY,J.E.C.(1985)Major Legal Systems in the World Today:An Introduction to the Comparative
Study of Law. London:Stevens, p.19.
101 PEIRCE, C.S. (probably composed early in 1894)What Is a Sign?, transcribed at
http://www.iupui.edu/〜peirce/web/ep/ep2/ep2book/ch02/ep2ch2.htm>.There are three kinds of interest we may take ina thing. First, we may have a primary interest in it for itself. Second, we may have a secondary interest in it, on accountof its reactions with other things. Third, we may have a mediatory interest in it, in so far as it conveys to a mind an idea
about a thing. In so far as it does this, it is a sign, or representation. (our emphasis).
102 This real world in opposition to a juridical world is a different concept than that one employed by HANS KELSEN［IS/OUGHT］in his Pure Theory of Law and also his General Theory of Norms.Here it is just about language theories
and interpretation, while there he was stipulating the function of law (the world of how things ought to be).

79

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
It is not at all wrong to say that the pre-trial phase closely relates to the first set and that the trial
itself is related to the second one.PS,excepting some few jurisdictions,play primary roles in both sets,
obviously because they are the ʻfunctionʼor ʻ
bridge-institutionʼ
. One may say prosecutors have a
twofold duty just because of their position in criminal procedure systems, and that is where theirpivotal role lies.
Adopting PACKERʼ
s theory,103 one may say that the pre-trial phase, among many jurisdictions, ischaracterized by crime-control, while trial is characterized by due process. Romano-Germanic law
systems of criminal procedure have traditionally given greater authority to the State with muchemphasis put on crime control.104 On the other hand,common law systems of criminal procedure with
their inherent distrust of the State are said to be more congruous with the concept of liberal
democracy,105 or due process.It is known that some Romano-Germanic criminal systems have recently
been through reforms.106 Those reforms mainly improved criminal procedure adopting and strengthening due process principles,basically in the trial phase,seeking to give a fast response and to decrease
the backlog of files. For this reason,many believed that inquisitorial procedure countries were moving
towards common law criminal systems. In contrast,countries like England were trying to ameliorate
their criminal system creating instruments like the CPS,107 and increasing the crime-control componentof the criminal persecution improving the pre-trial phaseʼs problematic side.108
One may say the characteristic of a good criminal procedure system is a trial based on due process
and a pre-trial substructure on crime-control.109 At least this is the contemporary tendency and has
been adopted by the Rome Statute.110

Since the infliction of punishment affects ʻ
the most precious possession of every citizen,the right to
111 the PS have to balance between the Statesʼ
freedom,which is the essence of humanity,ʼ
responsibility
to control crime and their obligation to protect civil liberties.112 It is hard to state if this incumbency
is a reflection of the PS position on criminal procedure systems or,alternatively,the positional valueof the PPs in criminal procedure is the result of their twofold attribution ― responsibility to control
crime and obligation to protect civil liberties.What is certain is that this twofold mission is entitled toprosecutors and their positional value is a strong argument to increase PS presence in IJCC.
D. Final Remarks
At first it seemed important to undertake the transnational criminality problem establishing a basic
pattern of prosecutorial service to enable the cooperative work between PS of different jurisdictions.
103 PACKER, H.L. (1968)The Limits of the Criminal Sanction, Stanford:Stanford University Press, pp.149173.
104 FASSLER,L.J.(1991)The Italian Penal Procedure Code: an Adversarial System of Criminal Procedure in Continental

Europe, 29 Columbia Journal of Transnational Law, pp.245-278.
105 Ibidem.
106 Supra n.7376.
107 Supra n.5971.
108 FIONDA, J. (1995)Public Prosecutors and Discretion:A Comparative Study, Oxford:Clarendon Press, p. 8.
109 PACKERʼS analysis is heavily in favour of the American system and he compares a procedural method (due process)with an objective (crime control).
110 Rome Statute,Articles 5361 (pre-trial,investigation,prosecution and the pre-trial Chamber functions and power)and
also Articles 62-76 (The Trial, principles and rights of the accused), http://www.un.org/icc>.
111 FASSLER, op.cit., pp.2578.
112 Ibidem.

80

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPER
However, the concern that different structures of PS were responsible for the lack of international
cooperation and the absence of interest in them was turned down after this attempt of establishing a
blueprint of a basic prosecutorial structure.
As this work developed,it became clear it was not important,not even relevant,to have a pattern
structure of PS.When there is cooperation between two or more individuals to realize a task,it is notnecessary for these individuals to have the same genetic pattern and cultural formation.Even the wordʻ
cooperationʼimplies heterogeneity of participants. What is necessary is the same goal and will totranslate thoughts into action.Accordingly,it is not necessaryto havethesamestructureofPS around theworld to enabletheir rolein IJCC.As onemight expect,oncetheir pivotal roleis understood,theimportanceof PS for international criminal law enforcement is to ensure fundamental rights and due process.
Therefore, although it is unfeasible to draw a pattern of prosecutorial structure establishing basic
powers and attributions ofprosecutors around the world,it is not impossible to have all the PS working
under a minimum standard of professional responsibility113 and pursuing the same goal of combatingtransnational criminality.

IV. CORPUS JURISThe Corpus Juris (CJ)114 is one of the latest attempts to protect the financial interests of the EU
under criminal law.It is a body of criminal provisions consisting ofthirty-five articles,divided into twoparts. The first part consists of criminal law (art. 1 to 17). It defines crimes of fraud against the EU
budget and lays down penalties. The second part consists of criminal procedure (art. 18 to 35). It
establishes the new European Public Prosecutor (EPP), investigations, committals, prosecutions,pre-trials, trials and execution of the sentences.
Without entering into a discussion of its pros and cons,115 and despite all the arguments CJ has
caused,two important initiatives have to be mentioned.The first is the radical proposal of article 18(1),which provides that ʻ
for the purposes of investigation, prosecution, trial and execution of sentences
concerning the newly created European budgetary crimes (articles 1 to 17), the territory of theM ember-States of the Union shall constitute a single legal areaʼ(our emphasis).The second important
point is the emphasis given to the created EPP in the exclusive international assignment to combat
fraud within the EU.
For the very first time the myth of the dual concept of national sovereignty and exclusive Statejurisdiction is broken with the idea of creating a common area among territories of different NationStates concerning a specific type of criminality.Anyhow,despite the fact that it has been created onlywith regards to protecting financial interests of the EU,it is groundbreaking,116 and it is not a hidden
agenda since it has been conceived as ʻ
the embryo of a future European Criminal Codeʼ.117 On the other
hand, the emphasis given to the role of the EPP signals the very crucial role PPs could be playing in
IJCC.The EPP will be present in every Member-State― the Director (EDPP)in Brussels and delegates(EdelPP)elsewhere― and he or she will decide whether or not to prosecute and where a person should
stand trial. However, it is still the national judge who has the power to convict or to release theaccused.
National justices are still competent to judge offenders, since this is the way to bring justice,simplicity and efficiency,as it is said in the explanatory memorandum.One may note that basically alist of crimes under a delimited territorial space and a pivotal institution to deal with them are
introducing this unification. The criminal justice of each Member-State remains untouched in a sense
113 Step already taken by the IAP adopting the Standards. Supra n.183.
114 For information about Corpus Juris in English

http://www.euroscep.dircon.co.uk/corpus.htm>.

115 The Resolution on the Corpus Juris was debated in the European Parliament on 12 April 1999. The motion to adopt

it received the overwhelming majority of 399 in favour, 48 against and 35 abstentions.
116 For instance, extradition process for European budgetary crimes becomes history among EU M emberStates.
117 Stated in San Sebastian Seminar, Spain, April 1997, when it was first presented by the European Commission to a
specially invited audience, as one of the two core objectives of the Corpus Juris. Supra n.408.

81

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
that they do not lose the competence to judge those crimes.
The CJ was trying to strike a balance between inquisitorial systems ― where investigation iscarried out by the juge dʼinstruction ― and accusatorial systems ― which entrust most powers ofinvestigation to the police. However, it can be said it ended up with a system which is basicallyinquisitorial in the totality of its provisions.118 This has resulted in great opposition from British
scholars, which will not be discussed here.119 Nevertheless, the problem with the CJ seems to be thecentralization of the procedure on the EPP rather than the emphasis on one criminal system or on
another. The PP in Brussels gives orders and delegates cases. It is understandable that fraud can doa lot of damage to the EU,not only financial but also in terms of its credibility.Nevertheless,it does
not justify the centralization of the system. A European tendency that confronts the tradition of
criminal law and criminal justice as symbols of State sovereignty that is not going to change overnight,
and this is the real reason for the strong criticisms.However,it is possible that without such centralization, the twofold solution of a ʻsingle legal areaʼand the pivotal role of PS would overcome theresistance based on the notion of State sovereignty.
According to DAM ASKA120 the nature of the criminal procedure is related to the institution thatcarries it out. By emphasizing prosecution, the new system is placed in between the accusatorial andinquisitorial models ― no juge dʼinstruction and no unrestricted powers of investigation to the policewith a passive PS.Both the role of supervision of the investigation121 and the independence of the PS
from national authorities and community institutions,embody an attempt to design a template institution to act at an international level,which is a contribution of extreme importance made by this ʻ
bodyof rulesʼto the improvement of IJCC.
One may argue that the UN could do the same, for instance, recognize and define a list of transnational crimes and consider the territories of the M ember-States as a single legal area for purposesof investigation,prosecution and trial of such crimes;and also designate UN PPs in each Member-Stateto deal with this set of crimes. These ʻ
UN PS Officesʼcould be staffed with career PPs of theM ember-States under a uniform international standard of professional responsibility, duties andpowers.122 However, national judges would have the power to convict or to release the accused;andprosecutors would work in strait relations with their pairs from abroad coordinating investigations intheir own country and exchanging requests and information (letters rogatory)directly without bureaucratic hindrances, yet ensuring the evidence is gathered legally and is acceptable for trial.
This outcome is a consequence of the position PPs occupy in every criminal justice system aroundthe world.Their attributions and powers may change from country to country as demonstrated before;
however, the duty to balance a Stateʼs responsibility to control crime and its obligation to protect
human rights and civil liberties remains immutable, making PS a pivotal institution also for IJCC.
Therefore,IJCC could be dealt with in offices of national prosecution in each country,even if theyneeded to be under the supervision of the Foreign Affairs M inistry or the Justice M inistry as aconsequence of internal rules of each county,which usually mitigates the desirable independence fromlocal government.An embryo of this already happens informally in the majority of transnational cases
in England without any written provision.None of the integrands of the National Crime Squad (NCS)
have an obligation to contact a crown prosecutor until a suspect has been charged.However,an NCS
senior investigator will usually contact the prosecutor at the local CPS office at an early stage in theinvestigation because it is helpful afterwards when the police want a commission rogatoire issued forevidence from abroad.123 Upon Section 3(3) Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1990,

118 WHITE, S. (1998)Protection of the Financial Interests of the European Communities:The Fight against Fraud andCorruption, The Hague:Kluber Law International, pp.182-183.
119 For criticisms:Torquil DickEricson. http://www.keele.ac.uk./socs/ks40/torq1.htm>.
120 DAM ASKA,M.(1975)Structures of Authority and Comparative Criminal Procedure,84 Yale Law Journal,pp.480544.
121 Tendency pointed out above.
122 Assignment already initiated by the IAP with the adoption of the Standards.
123 HARFIELD,C.(1999)These Foreign Laws
Issues Facing UK Investigators when Gathering Evidence of Criminality from European Jurisdictions, (unpublished LLM Dissertation, University of Sussex), Chapters 4 and 5.

82

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPERcrown prosecutors and customs solicitors can issue letters rogatory on behalf of investigators. They
are sent via CPS Head Quarters (Casework Directorate)direct to the requested country. In very rarecases a prosecutor may even travel abroad to advise foreign authorities on how evidence should begathered on behalf of the UK Police.124
Transnational crime should be treated as such,with the prefix ʻtransʼin front of the measures taken
to combat it.That is to say the territory of the involved countries should be considered as a single legal
area for criminal justice purposes when dealing with transnational criminality. The communication
system is another element that has to be employed in the same ways transnational offenders do so,withthe most recent information technology and with contact made directly from one PS office to another.
The malleability PP have between the two extremes of criminal procedure― judge on one end and thepolice on the other ― and their duty to fight crime preserving human rights, shows that PS are theepitome of this assignment.

V. CONCLUSION
The argument of this work is very simple.PS play a pivotal role in domestic criminal procedures;
they should also have a primary role in IJCC to speed up trial and combat transnational criminality.
The idea to consider the role they might play to improve IJCC grew when we noticed not only that they
had no relevant participation, but also that IJCC was being taken as synonymous for police cooperation.When it comes to combating transnational crime,police cooperation has stolen the limelight andit seems to have been the focus of the improvement of mutual assistance in criminal matters in recent
years. Rather than research the reasons for this lack of participation, we verified that PS have asignificant role to play internationally.
Just as any legal enterprise, transnational criminal groups take advantage of the opportunities
provided by technological advances and the process of deregulation of transnational exchanges toenable greater freedom of movement of goods, persons and information. They are basically not new
crimes, but they gained mammoth economic and political relevance as a consequence of the factors
mentioned above.
Transnational expansion of organized and systematic crime requires a corresponding expansion oftransnational law, law enforcement, and criminal justice. At first, the heterogeneity of PS seemed tobe the problem for the absence of PS in the IJCC. Although an analysis of PS all over the world
suggests heterogeneity,we conclude it is neither important nor relevant to establish a pattern structureof PS. We believe that this heterogeneity enriches international cooperation through the exchange ofideas, institutions, and good policies. Nevertheless, a minimum standard of conduct seems necessary.
Despite the logical simplicity of this statement,one must recognize the grave difficulties in harmonization.Differences in legal tradition,particularly differences in the structure ofnational criminal legal
systems ― sovereignty ― make the process of harmonizing laws, requested by multilateral andbilateral agreements, difficult at best. Moreover, cultural differences are deep, particularly because
they are related to human rights and the effectiveness of criminal sanctions.Finally,differences in theorganizational patterns of law enforcement and justice also make transnational cooperation tricky
since the interactions between the different actors of the criminal justice system vary from one country
to another. Thus, Ministers of Justice, M inisters of the Interior, and directors of Prosecutor General
Offices all have different roles to play with varying amounts of authority in different countries.All ofthese differences and others present obstacles to effective action against transnational criminals.
Criminal justice is a very delicate sphere of national government since it is concerned directly withthe freedom of individuals and the maintenance of social order, and it should be recognized that
Nation-States are reluctant to surrender their prerogatives in this area to the international community
since this is tantamount to an abandonment of sovereignty. Nevertheless, some progress must berecognized.Multilateral and bilateral agreements have been creating a normative framework of IJCC,
and national legislation to the agreements reached at these conventions is being enacted.This has been
124 Ibidem.

83

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No. 95
a firm basis for IJCC. Governments have intensified international judicial criminal cooperation,although such judicial cooperation may well be translated solely in international police cooperation,
especially under the influence of the USAʼs policy to combat transnational crime. In particular, tocombat transnational crime is not only a matter of its detection and prevention, but also of theinterrelationship between States to prosecute and punish international offenders. Because of this, wethink it is possible and also necessary to press these international cooperative efforts further.
Some countries adopted and intensified new forms of investigation techniques, maybe because thebasic function of the State ― to provide security― is visualized by the general public as the responsibility of the police. On the other hand, the end of the Cold War and subsequent refocusing ofintelligence away from the Soviet Union upon the ʻ
newʼthreat to national security ― transnational
crime/terrorism ― aroused questionable responses to combat such criminality. To contain the threat
to human rights and civil liberties imposed by theseʻnewʼinvestigative techniques,it seems,once more,that the presence of PS in IJCC will be important.
On the one hand, the introduction of new or more effective legislation to combat transnational
crime, corruption, money laundering, special techniques of investigation, asset seizure confiscation
measures, etc., strengthened the fight against transnational crime,but seemed not to be sufficient.On
the other hand,criminal opportunities can be reduced by concerted action.Nevertheless,the growth ofcriminal justice bureaucracies may even prove to be counterproductive, not only with lacuna of
democratic skills,but also because red-tape and bureaucraticʻ
turf warsʼlead to misplaced energies anddelays in action when formal procedures are followed. The idea is not to suggest that formal
mechanisms be discarded in favour ofinformal collaboration.On the contrary,the idea is to give a little
more attention to cooperative relations.And,in this sense,we suggest the increase of the role of PS in
IJCC could result in this.
Crime has always been international in nature. States made it a concern of their own sovereignty
and power over governed persons.Now they are entrapped by the magnitude of transnational criminality and inflexibility of their own systems. Success in combating transnational crime depends on thedesign of the international cooperative machinery. For this, the use of the already existent criminal
justice infrastructure is desirable and imperative. Likewise, strategic investments should be madetaking into consideration factors that lead to the flourishing of transnational criminality, of importance here are the professionalization of their human sources and information technology, gives thegoal of concerted action.
Recalling the argument we termed positional value; the fact that PS are the backbone of domestic
criminal justice and the increasing role of prosecutors in administering criminal justice in theirdomestic jurisdiction;the fact that it is not necessaryto have the same structure ofPS around the world
to enable their role in IJCC,125 but basic standards alone to harmonize their output;the improvements
achieved in Germanic criminal justice on account of its PS;126 the weight,recognizing the above points,
given by the CCP to the EPS to deal with transnational crime in the EU (although onlybudgetaryones);
the international law tendency established by the prosecution offices of the UN war tribunals and the
ICC;the problems in the concentration of power in ʻ
super-agenciesʼand new forms of policing,rather
than in a democratic web structure;and finally, the responsibility of PS to control crime and their
obligation to protect civil liberties and guarantee of human rights:all these make the PS the epitomeof a concerted action for IJCC.
IJCC success depends on many factors. Nevertheless, it certainly could be improved with the PS
playing, in the international scenario, the same crucial role they play in domestic judicial criminal
procedure.

125 Even in countries without a tradition of public prosecution services like in England and Wales,the placement of crownprosecutors in police stations is already a reality and, in addition there are signs that police forces responsible fortransnational criminality― National Crime Squad ― have been also working with crown prosecutors to speed up theirrequests and secure their actions.
126 GRAHAM , op.cit., p.154156;167.

84

158TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEPARTICIPANTʼS PAPER

85