Co - Rapporteur’s Report

Opening Session
Session One: Effective Administration of the Police
Session Two: Restoring the Integrity of the Criminal Justice System Elimination of Corruption in the Criminal Justice System
Session Three: Reform of the Legal Training System
Session Four: Judicial Reform
Session Five: Reform of the Treatment of Offenders – Community
Involvement
Recommendations

Opening Session
A.

Opening Ceremony

The Indonesia - UNAFEI - JICA Joint Seminar on “Criminal Justice Reform” commenced
on 18 December 2002 in Jakarta, Indonesia. After the arrival of the distinguished guests andparticipants, the Seminar began with a brief introduction from Prof. Dr. Harkristuti Harkrisnowo
who explained that there were 5 speakers from Japan and 12 speakers from all over Indonesia.
His Excellency Mr. Yutaka Iimura (Ambassador of Japan) expressed his pleasure in
opening the Seminar. He stated that Indonesia is in transition and reform in the criminal justicesystem is the key to reform generally. Japan takes great pride in working together with Indonesia
in their criminal justice reform programme. Many people from Japan have been posted inpositions with the Indonesian government. Mr. Iimura stated that the desire is to move onto thenext stage of reform and this Seminar marks an opportunity to extend this process. While theJapanese speakers had come to share their experiences the hope was that this would not be a oneway street but an exchange of experiences.
Mr. Michio Kanda (Resident Representative of JICA, Japan) expressed his deep
appreciation for all organs within the government of Indonesia who have assisted in organizing
this Seminar. The speaker explained that he was proud to be able to attend this Seminar where
criminal legal reform could be discussed between both Indonesian and Japanese participants.
JICA, since January 2002, have been preparing programmes concerned with criminal law reformand particularly in connection with police reform and this Seminar provided further foundations
for progress in the reform of the criminal justice system in Indonesia.
Mr. Kwik Kian Gie (Minister, National Development Planning Agency, Indonesia)
expressed his deepest appreciation to the government of Japan for initiating and implementing
this Seminar. The speaker expected the Seminar to promote networking and cooperation between
Japan and Indonesia in the field of criminal justice and criminal law reform. Mr. Kwik
highlighted the need for better legal training to be given in Indonesia and he hoped that the
speakers would explain the respective systems for training and that the best system for legal
training would be adopted.
Prof. Dr. Romli Atmasasmita (National Development Planning Agency, Indonesia)
expressed his gratitude to all speakers and guests at the Seminar. It was noted that the criminal
justice system in Indonesia faces many difficulties. The object of the Seminar should be to
exchange experiences and extend cooperation between Indonesia and Japan. Appreciation was
expressed to the agencies within Indonesia and Japan for helping to realize this Seminar.
Mr. Kunihiko Sakai (Director, UNAFEI, Japan) expressed his pleasure to chair the
Seminar and his deep gratitude to the government of Indonesia and JICA. UNAFEI was honored
to be able to participate in this Seminar with so many high-ranking criminal justice personnel.
The legal system provides us with the rule of law that is the basis for a fair society. Many
countries are currently undertaking extensive legal reform. The Japanese system has been
criticized for having too lengthy a judicial process and Japan is now undergoing the greatest
criminal law reform since the Second World War. Mr. Sakai hoped that the Seminar would serve
as a cornerstone in developing cooperation between Japan and Indonesia in the field of criminal
law reform.
−3−Session One: Effective Administration of the PoliceA.

Presentations

This session was chaired by Mr. Budi Wicaksono (UNDIP) and there were threepresentations. The first paper, entitled “Effective Police Administration: Criminal Investigationsin Japan” was delivered by Mr. Masakatsu Okabe (Police Superintendent, Deputy Director, Police
Policy Research Center, National Police Academy, Japan). The second paper “Effective
Administration of the Police” was presented by Prof. Dr. Satjipto Rahardjo (UNDIP, Indonesia).
Brigjen Pol. Drs. Aryanto Sutadi presented the third paper, “Effective Administration of the
Police for the Improvement of an Integrated Criminal Justice System. ”
Mr. Okabe opened by stating that a programme of cooperation between Indonesia andJapan has already started. Advice has been given by Japanese police officers to the Indonesianpolice for the last two years. This cooperation project has been epoch making and it is hoped that
this cooperation will not just be short term. The speaker spoke of how Japan has been facing greatchange in the number of offences committed and cleared. The situation has deteriorated greatly as
the number of offences has dramatically increased yet the number of offences cleared has
decreased. The speaker’s presentation was divided into two parts - a background to police
criminal investigations and the characteristics of police investigations.
Mr. Okabe spoke of the limited legal competence of the Japanese police. In Japan there iswhat is known as “minute justice” or seimitsu shiho - this is the extremely strict consideration ofevidence during the trial process and this concept places a great burden on the police in terms of
their investigations. The speaker further spoke of the cooperation between citizens and the policethat forms the basis of successful police operations in Japan. The police in Japan are entrustedwith honestly handling citizen’s requests and complaints. He gave examples, however, of recent
cases where the police have been heavily criticized for not handling complaints correctly. This
has led to certain reforms of the police in Japan such as the establishment of police station
councils. Mr. Okabe also spoke about the changing circumstances in Japan such as; the increasein the number of offences, new types of laws (e.g. domestic violence laws), and victim support.
In relation to the characteristics of police investigations Mr. Okabe talked of the important role
played by high-ranking police officers, the importance of team work in investigations, ad hoc
investigation headquarters, mobile investigation groups, emergency deployment orders andadvice and guidance to the frontline. He spoke briefly of forensic investigations and also aboutcountermeasures under the new criminal situation (e.g. high-tech crime).
Dr. Rahardjo opened by stating that his analysis of the situation would be moresociological than technical. He welcomed the contribution of the Japanese speakers to bring in a
fresh approach to criminal law reform in Indonesia. Indonesia today is in the midst of a gravetransition and is in the process of recovery. The police themselves are facing a huge task ofreforming themselves. A distinct aspect of police work is to protect and to serve the people whichis the essence of the special job known as policing. Since the mid-1960’s the POLRI (Indonesianpolice) have been integrated with the military. Only since 1999 have the POLRI been withdrawn
from the military to be given their independence but they must still operate within the shadow of
the military. The most important thing in the effective administration of the police in Indonesia is
to accelerate the police’s independence. Dr. Rahardjo spoke of the different make-up of Indonesia
in terms of the urban and rural sectors and how the police must respond to each different sector−4−appropriately. Finally the mounting incidences of riots were considered by the speaker and thefrustrations this causes the police was highlighted.
Mr. Sutadi said that there are two things that strongly influence the Indonesian police - ademand for a civilian police force and a demand for regional autonomy. The separation of POLRI
from the military has almost doubled the number of police jobs. POLRI is charged withinvestigation and must link the criminal court to criminal cases. The speaker spoke of thedifferences between military and police values and culture. Time is required to change the value
system in POLRI but this must take place in the face of high expectations. There is a need toincrease the number of investigators and improve professional capability in order to develop
POLRI. It is thought that POLRI will divide into two types - uniformed and plain clothed officers.
The speaker talked about the new strategy on 'capability maintenance' that has been developed. In
addition Mr. Sutadi considered the responses to the idea of regional police and how such a system
can work in Indonesia.
B.

Discussion

Since 1999 POLRI has been separated from the military. This has occurred at the higher
levels but it must happen at all levels in order to be effective. It is hoped that changes can bemade from top to bottom. It was noted that there is definitely a lack of police personnel. It was
raised from the floor that it is important for the Indonesian police to learn from the Japanesepolice in their fight against organized crime. Japan suffered a terrorist attack in 1995 in the formof the sarin gas incident in the Tokyo subway system. Indonesia now suffers from terrorism andcan learn from the Japanese experience.

−5−

Session Two: Restoring the Integrity of the Criminal Justice
System - Elimination of Corruption in the Criminal Justice System
A.

Presentations

This session was chaired by Mr. Hikmahanto Juwana (University of Indonesia) and there
were three presentations. The first paper, entitled, “Restoring the Integrity of the Criminal Justice
System - Elimination of Corruption in Criminal Justice” was delivered by Mr. Yuichiro Tachi(Professor, UNAFEI). Mr. Muladi (UNDIP, Indonesia) delivered the second paper which had thesame title as the session. The third paper, “Payment of a Compensation Penalty as an Additional
Penalty in Corruption Cases” was presented by Mr. Yoseph Suardi Sabda (Attorney- General’s
Office, Indonesia).
Mr. Tachi stated that the concept of corruption is very wide but that his presentation
would focus on criminal corruption cases. In Japan there are a number of investigative agencies
such as the police and public prosecutors. Public prosecutors, judges and private attorneys all
have to pass the same National Bar Examination in order to practice law. Prosecutorial functions
are vested in the Diet but prosecutors are guaranteed independence and the Minister of Justicecannot control a prosecutor directly which is a basic tenet of the rule of law. The police in Japan
carry out more than 99% of investigative duties. The police and prosecution are independent fromeach other but cooperate very closely. In Tokyo, Osaka and Nagoya there are special departmentsthat deal with corruption cases focusing especially on bribery cases. The speaker spoke about
how confessions in Japan were obtained by the prosecutor/police establishing a relationship withthe suspect. Mr. Tachi went on to speak about some of the corruption scandals that have occurredin Japan since 1954 until the present day. He considered some of the various traditional measures
to prevent corruption in Japan including adequate and proper remuneration for public officials.
Dr. Muladi opened by stating that the integrity of the criminal justice system is very
important in promoting a civil society. Restoring integrity has been very important in Indonesia
since 1998 when Indonesia started its ongoing process of reform. Corruption is one of the fourcauses of miscarriages of justice. According to the substantive law, corruption has been definedvery comprehensively but in terms of the criminal justice system it should be defined as bribery
which includes a number of unlawful acts. The integrity of the judiciary as well as the criminal
justice system is central to the maintenance of a democratic society. According to the Josephson
Institute of Ethics, public service ethics consist of; public service, objective judgment,
accountability, democratic leadership and respectability. No corruption is more damaging thancorruption among justice and security officials. In terms of discretion judges, police officers,
prosecutors and corrections officials must exercise their discretion in a sound, mature andthoughtful way. The speaker gave examples of the types of corruption and how such corruption
can arise. He considered a triple-track approach to combating corruption; the preventive approach,the detective approach and the repressive approach. Corruption is now a predicate offence for the
purposes of money laundering in Indonesia. A Judicial Commission has now been created and an
Anti-Corruption Commission that demonstrates the sound political will of the government toeliminate all kinds of corruption.
Mr. Sabda’s presentation focused on payment of a compensation penalty as an additional
penalty in corruption cases. Indonesian criminal law recognizes two kinds of penalty; theprincipal penalty and the additional penalty. An additional penalty should be imposed with a−6−principal penalty and cannot be imposed separately. There are two problems in relation to acompensation penalty; how should the amount be determined and what are the legal
consequences of non-payment or partial payment of the penalty. It has been suggested that‘assets’ should not be interpreted literally but as everything that could be or has been enjoyed by
the corrupter. As regards non-payment or partial payment Law No. 3 1971 can be applied whichstates that a substitute punishment can be applied which can be up to 8 months imprisonment.
This period of imprisonment does not appear to be long enough and would not be a deterrent in
non or partial payment of the penalty. It is recommended that an additional penalty should be life
imprisonment or even the death penalty. The law does not require the court to state the length ofan additional penalty and a court could actually make the additional penalty more severe than theoriginal penalty. The speaker concluded that there must be psychological pressure to prevent
people from committing crimes of corruption and this should be reflected by more severe
criminal penalties.
B.

Discussion

It was raised that there is a need to find an effective way to stop corruption in Indonesia.
Punishment for corruption has been lenient. Law enforcement in Indonesia has been seen to beinconsistent. Preventive control is not supervised properly and such control is very important incombating corruption. It was accepted that the judiciary must remain independent in order tocombat corruption. This calls for impartiality without improper pressures. There must be personal
immunity against threats; and suspension and removal should be applied in appropriate
circumstances. The recruitment system needs a special agency to supervise recruitment. It was
felt that the Judicial Commission should now be responsible for the appointment of judges.
Efforts must be made to ensure the Anti- Corruption Commission does not fail. Salaries are oneof the main factors that prevent corruption and this should be considered carefully by theIndonesian government.

−7−Session Three: Reform of the Legal Training System
A.

Presentations

This session was chaired by Mr. Komariah (UNPAD) and there were three presentations. A
paper entitled, “Reform of the Legal Training System in Japan” was delivered by Ms. Tomoko
Akane (Deputy Director, UNAFEI). The second paper, “Reform of the Legal Training System inIndonesia” was given by Mr. Abdul Rahman Saleh (Supreme Court, Indonesia). Ms. Harkristuti
Harkrisnowo (University of Indonesia) gave the third presentation on, “Improving the Legal
System through Continuing Legal Education and Training.”
Ms. Akane gave a history of the Japanese legal training system. During the Meiji Era(1868-1911) professional exams were put in place for judges and prosecutors as the concept of alegal profession was introduced in Japan. The speaker went on to speak about the current
situation of legal training in Japan. There is one National Bar Examination for all lawyers (private
attorneys, prosecutors and judges) that is open to everybody but is very competitive - the successrate of candidates taking the examination is under 3 %. In 1985 there were 25,000 applicants but
only 500 candidates were successful. The number of legal professionals per person in Japan isextremely small compared to other countries. Ms. Akane spoke about the type of education
provided in Universities in Japan. One of the biggest problems in Japan is the small number oflegal professionals. The number of professionals is simply insufficient to meet the demands of the
public. In June 2001, the Justice System Reform Council submitted a number ofrecommendations that clearly set the targets to increase the legal population. At the forefront ofthese recommendations is the establishment of Law Schools that will provide a New National Bar
Examination. The speaker concluded by making a number of recommendations for theIndonesian legal training system to consider.
Mr. Saleh recognized that although sound legal training is basic to the foundation of therule of law such legal training is not adequate in Indonesia. The speaker gave an overview of
judicial training in Indonesia. When a person finishes the study of law at a law faculty he/she
must sit an exam set by the Department of Justice. A successful applicant may then enter training
offered by the Department of Justice that lasts for eight months. After such training a candidate
can be accepted for internship in the courts of first instance. The speaker gave figures for thenumber of judges who underwent training in 2002. He further spoke of reforms that are currently
underway in Indonesia.
Dr. Harkrisnowo gave 8 ideals for criminal justice personnel. She spoke about some ofthe external factors that operate upon the criminal justice system such as the socio-politicalsystem. According to the legal system in Indonesia students first take a university degree. Thereare 28 public law schools and 180 private law schools. Continuing legal education is conductedby various institutions but there is no standardized curriculum, no quality control and no unified
nor national examination for all lawyers to enter the legal profession. The funding for legal
education in Indonesia is very limited. The speaker proposed a number of actions; the recruitment
system should be objective and transparent with clearly defined qualifications, experienced legal
professionals should be recruited, a curriculum should be developed on a needs assessment basis
and involve both practicing lawyers and academics, adequate course material should be provided
to fit the needs of the profession, lecturers should have basic abilities and deliver more than basic
information in order to enhance legal reasoning. Since 1995 there have been proposals to−8−establish one-roof education but this has yet to be achieved.
B.

Discussion

The legal training systems of Indonesia and Japan were thoroughly discussed in thissession. It was observed that there are significant differences between the systems of Indonesia
and Japan regarding recruitment of judges and public prosecutors and continuous education
systems thereof.
In Japan, judges and public prosecutors receive higher salaries than other government
officials. It was raised that, in Indonesia, they receive insufficient salaries, and this is one of theserious problems that need to be addressed.

−9−Session Four: Judicial ReformA.

Presentations

This session was chaired by Mr. Maru’arar Siahaan (Benkulu High Court, Indonesia) andthere were three presentations. The first paper entitled, “Independence, Transparency andAccountability of the Judiciary in Japan” was presented by Mr. Toru Miura (Professor, UNAFEI).
The second paper, “Supreme Court Reform and Judicial Independence” was delivered by Mr.
Bagir Manan (Chief Justice, Supreme Court, Indonesia). Mr. Romli Atmasamita (BPHN,
Indonesia) gave the third presentation, “Judicial Reform: Prospects and Challenges of the
Judiciary System in Indonesia.”
Mr. Miura spoke of how Japan is currently undergoing a great deal of legal reform. In
June 2001 the Justice System Reform Council produced its final report that covered every aspectof the nation’s legal system. Independence, transparency and accountability are central themesthat have been taken up in the report. The speaker gave a history of the Japanese judicial systemsince the Meiji Era. He gave an overview of Japan’s constitution and the separation of powers
between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. The Japanese court structure was
explained; the Supreme Court is the final court of law and below this is the High Court, theDistrict Court and the Summary Court. The Cabinet appoints all judges except the Supreme Court
Chief Justice who is appointed by the Emperor. Members of the Justice System Reform Council
came from various sections of society in order to try and reflect public sentiment in judicial
reform. The recommendations of the Council included; diversification of the sources of supply,
re-examination of procedures for the appointment of judges and the personnel system for judges,
popular participation in the management of the courts and mutual exchanges between legal
professionals. Mr. Miura looked at how the disclosure and furnishing of information by the courts
could be promoted. He noted how important public participation in the justice process is and how
the Council have made a number of recommendations for increasing public participation such as;
the introduction of laypersons in civil, family, and juvenile cases. The Council highlighted how afair justice system must be one that is speedy.
Chief Justice Manan opened by reaffirming how important the independence of the
judiciary is to uphold the rule of law. In reality the Indonesian judicial system is not independent.
Reform has been ongoing for almost five years but Act No. 35 of 1999 that aims to eliminate
government interference has not yet been implemented. In order to build an independent judiciary
the conditions have to be conducive and restructuring will only work in the same way as social
reform to make society transparent and responsible to law-abiding society. In restructuring the
judicature Chief Justice Manan looked at legal education, lawyers themselves, the bureaucracy,
the political parties, the rule of law, and an integrated criminal justice system. Certain parts of thePenal Code have to be reformed. Looking at the judicial process only a small percentage of cases
actually get to court as most are settled out of court. The Supreme Court is getting an increasingly
large workload of laws to review. There needs to be an awareness that only the people within the
judicial system can realize a justice system of integrity. Appropriate training of judges is essential
in the effective administrative of justice. Many talk about the corruption of judges but not many
speak of the poor salary of judges and there needs to be a balance in the way the media reports
about the judiciary.
Dr. Atmasasmita stated that in the last thirty-five years since its independence,−10−

Indonesian legal reform has not been successful. The criminal justice system faces many
problems such as a lack of qualified judges, prosecutors and police, low remuneration, lack of astrong commitment and leadership among criminal justice officials and corruption within the
courts. Of this, the recruitment process is of prime importance and should be deemed to be at theroot of many of the problems. The speaker observed that the efforts of combating corruption
within the public and private sector has ended in vain. Looking at the different models of judicial
responsibility the speaker considered the separation model to be the correct model to follow inIndonesia. An independent institution such as the Judicial Commission is needed to control andmonitor the criminal justice agencies.
B.

Discussion

A number of questions were raised about alternative conflict resolution. Not all criminal
acts can be solved by mediation but certainly if cases are appropriate then mediation should be
used appropriately. In Sumatra there is a pilot project on reconciliation and if this works thenjudges could become involved and specially trained. Not all persons are in favour of mediation
especially lawyers as this reduces their workload and fees.
The working conditions and training for judges was also discussed in this session.

−11−

Session Five: Reform of the Treatment of Offenders - Community Involvement
A.

Presentations

This session was chaired by Mr. Paulus Hadisuprapto (UNDIP, Indonesia) and there were
three presentations. The first presentation, “Community Involvement in the Japanese Criminal
Justice System Specifically Focusing upon the Volunteer Probation Officer System in theCommunity-Based Treatment of Offenders” was given by Mr. Kei Someda (Professor, UNAFEI).
The second presentation, with the same title as the session, was given by Mr. Adi Suyatno(Director-General of Corrections, Indonesia). Mr. Ronny Nitibaskara (University of Indonesia)
gave the third presentation on, “The Urgent Need to Reform Treatment Towards Corruption
Offenders in Indonesia ”.
Mr. Someda opened by speaking about the long tradition of community involvement in
the criminal justice system. He spoke of community involvement in the police in the form of
local community crime prevention volunteers and juvenile guidance volunteers. In the Family
Court, the Juvenile Friendship Volunteer Association supports juveniles who are under tentative
probationary supervision. The Correction Service has the Volunteer Prison Visitor System
whereby volunteers visit inmates and provide them with various types of support. The Probation
Service has Volunteer Probation Officers (VPOs), Judicial Persons for Rehabilitation Services,
Members of Women’s Association for Rehabilitation Aid, Members of Big Brothers and Sisters
Movement and Cooperative Employers. The speaker spoke extensively about the VPO system inJapan. As of April 2002, there were 48,931 VPOs and the average age was 63.5 years old, almost
a quarter of which were women. VPOs’ activities fall into two types; rehabilitation aid activities
and crime prevention activities. VPOs meet regularly with parolees, obtain support from parents,
teachers and cooperative employers and provide urgent assistance such as going to police stationsin the middle of the night. The VPO system was acknowledged in statute in Japan in 1939 and theVolunteer Probation Officer Law of 1950 governs the modern VPO system. The problems facedby the VPO system include whether the same level of support can be provided as that bygovernment agencies and the generation gap between officers and probationers. Mr. Someda went
on to speak about juridical persons for rehabilitation services, halfway houses and rehabilitation
aid associations.
Mr. Suyatno introduced his presentation by speaking generally about the reasons for
prisons and the purposes of imprisonment. The primary role of corrections is to restore
relationships and to support individuals as autonomous human beings. The speaker talked about
the ten correctional principles that guide correctional policy in Indonesia. The primary
responsibility of the Correction Service is to successfully return offenders to the community. The
speaker identified a number of factors that are fundamental to the work of corrections; related
institutions (such as governmental agencies), social organizations (such as non-governmental
agencies) and cooperation with third parties (such as potential employers). Currently in Indonesia
corrections are concentrating on inmates suffering from drug-related problems and looking at
how to implement human rights concepts. There is a problem with overcrowding in prisons inIndonesia. Compared to Japan, Indonesia has very few non-governmental agencies especially inthe corrections field. In conclusion Mr. Suyatno spoke of how the keyword to treatment is thecommunity itself that must provide trust, support and a helping hand without which thecorrections service cannot succeed.

−12−Dr. Nitibaskara looked at the urgent need to reform treatment towards offenders
convicted of corruption cases in Indonesia. The speaker pointed out that severe punishment is notalways a deterrent. The concept of the treatment of offenders cannot be separated from the newconcepts of crime. There are two factors that are often neglected in penal studies but whichshould attract particular attention; firstly the actual condition of society and secondly the varietyof crimes. While the USA might now be focusing on terrorism, Indonesia is focused on
corruption. The key to reformed treatment is severe punishment and non-discrimination.
B.

Discussion

It was pointed out that offenders often find it difficult to integrate in the community after
prison. Halfway houses are useful and should be implemented in Indonesia as they are in Japan.
In addition it was noted that only those that really need treatment are imprisoned in Japan. It wasnoted that Indonesian culture is totally different to that of Japan, it is heterogeneous as opposed tohomogeneous. Shame plays a large part in Japanese society but many officials in Indonesia do
not feel any shame when practicing corruption.

−13−

RECOMMENDATIONSA.

Preamble

Currently in Indonesia there appear to be negative perceptions and public apathy towards thecriminal justice system. The fact that this system is unsatisfactory cannot be denied. Discriminative
treatment within the legal apparatus, unprotected legal rights of the accused, witnesses and victims, alengthy and complicated criminal process, corruption in many segments of the legal institutions, aswell as sentencing disparity, demonstrate that the criminal justice system has not been successful.
One of the identified causes of these conditions is the non-existence of "an agreed upon
objective" by the supporting subsystems within the criminal justice system, including a clear
stipulation of the duties and functions of each subsystem. In this context it is quite apparent that theso-called "system" is working somewhat unsystematically, since each subsystem conducts its duties
in a fragmented manner.
In order to establish a sound and developed society, we should ensure there is transparency,
impartiality and integrity in the criminal justice process. In particular, the integrity of judicial officials
is the most important aspect in achieving the trust of the public.
B.

Recommendations

1.

As state agencies responsible for maintaining the rule of law, criminal justice agencies shouldhave guiding principles applicable to all. The main principles that should be incorporated
within the system are: fairness and due process of law, the principle of legality, accountability,transparency, effectiveness and efficiency, and simplicity and expediency.
Coordination and cooperation among agencies must be promoted to ensure the just andexpeditious administration of justice, thus avoiding the oft-cited conflicting policies, which
reduce the quality of the criminal justice system.
Sufficient attention should be given to protect the fundamental human rights of persons
who fall under the criminal justice system by complying with international instruments
including the United Nations standards and norms.
As Indonesia is struggling towards a more professional and democratic criminal justicesystem, each criminal justice agency（the police, the prosecutors office, the judiciary andthe correctional agency）should strive towards improving their performance, especially inmatters related to management, both human resources and operational management.
The participation of the community must be ensured to enhance the performance of thecriminal justice system in various ways. The formation of community-based groups
would be of great assistance not only for crime prevention-related activities, but also for
educating the public at large on criminal justice issues.
A strong framework should be established to guarantee the independence of the judiciary.
Appropriate mechanisms should be established to ensure every judge is not subject toundue influence, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect.
Every effort should be made to make the courts more reliable, effective and accessible so
as to respond properly and speedily to the needs of society.
Access to information about justice including statutes and judicial precedents should be
actively promoted.
Recognizing the importance of securing competent criminal justice professionals, such as

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.
8.
9.

−14−

10.
11.

12.

13.
14.

15.

16.

17.

judges, public prosecutors, practicing lawyers, police officers and so on:(i) Candidates to be legal professionals should be provided with broad and adequate legal
education at the undergraduate stage and beyond;(ii) A fair and proper procedure for selecting, recruiting and appointing legal professionals
should be established;(iii) Legal professionals should be provided with continuing and on-the-job training to
improve their professional skill and knowledge in times of rapid development inscience and technology, and globalization;(iv) To enhance the promotion of a “one roof” judicial system of education.
Investigation and prosecution of corruption should be free from undue political, economic
and other improper influences.
An effective control mechanism is required for law enforcement agencies to promote law
and justice for the people. There should be an adequate number of professionals,
necessary resources and sufficient remuneration. An ethics mechanism including a codeof conduct, strict internal and external controls should be established.
The proper and necessary equipment required to operate is imperative since much
misbehavior committed by criminal justice personnel is alleged to be a result of a lack offacilities in the respective agencies.
The role of the legislature in promoting the work of the criminal justice system should beemphasized through its law-making process, where public participation is a necessity.
A trustworthy relationship between the police and the public is the basis of effective police
administration, especially of effective criminal investigation. So the police should
maintain the confidence of the public in various ways such as honestly handling citizens’
requests, responding quickly to citizens’ complaints, providing proper victim protection
and support and so on.
Organized investigations and forensic investigations are essential to effective police
criminal investigations. To achieve this end, the police should establish an organizedinvestigation system and introduce various scientific techniques such as fingerprint
identification, DNA testing and so on.
To promote the reintegration of offenders into society, the enhancement of greatercommunity involvement in the management of corrections and probation services should
be encouraged.
The conditions in correctional institutions and services accorded to inmates should be
improved to protect the basic human rights and to promote the rehabilitation of offenders.

Prof. Dr. Romli Atmasasmita
General Chairperson

Mr. Kunihiko Sakai
General Chairperson

Prof. Dr. Harkristuti Harkrisnowo
Secretary General−15−