GROUP 2
CODES OF CONDUCT FOR JUDGES, PROSECUTORSAND LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members
Visiting Experts
Advisers

Mr. Hussain Shameem
Mr. Manabu Imai
Mr. Bishnu Prasad Upadhyaya
Mr. Yuki Mori
Mr. Khalid Salim Fadhil
Mr. Long Ta Cuu Doan
Ms. Gereltuya Gombojav
Mr. Sunghoon Park
Ms. Judith B. Wish
Deputy Director Haruhiko Ukawa
Prof. Fumiko AkahaneProf. Junichi Watanabe
Prof. Ayako Sakonji(Maldives)(Japan)(Nepal)(Japan)(Oman)(Vietnam)(Mongolia)(UNODC)(USA)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCION
This Group started its discussion on 9 October 2009. The group elected, by consensus, Mr. Shameem
from Maldives as its Chairperson, Mr. Imai from Japan as Co-chairperson, and Mr. Upadhyaya from Nepaland Mr. Mori from Japan as its Rapporteur and Co-rapporteur respectively.
The Group was assigned to discuss “Codes of Conduct for Judges, Prosecutors and Law Enforcement
Officials”. Under the above mentioned theme, the group agreed to discuss the following issues as sub-topics.
1. Current situation and issues concerning corruption or misconduct;
2. Legal ethics, professional responsibilities and codes of conduct in the judiciary and prosecutorial/law
enforcement authorities;
3. Other measures to prevent corruption and misconduct in the judiciary and prosecutorial/law enforcement
authorities;
4. Appointment, education and training;
5. Procedural regulations.

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS
A. Current Situation And Issues Concerning Corruption or Misconduct
1. Current Situation
Members of the group took turns to introduce their countries and the situation in their countries in general,in terms of the legal system and issues relating to corruption. This was mainly a brief of the Individual Papers
presented during the previous couple of weeks. The members agreed that in order to better understand theposition of the represented countries, it was important to understand their legal systems.
Corruption and corrupt activities by officials are criminalized in all the countries represented and corruption
is always seen by the public as a disgrace or shameful.
The first issue that the group discussed was defining corruption and the perception of corruption indifferent countries. Corruption was agreed to be defined as ‘the abuse of entrusted power for private gain bya public official’. It was obvious from the discussion that the general public perception of corruption differs
widely from country to country and from culture to culture. It was also observed that this perception has
roots in the socio-political situation of the country. Therefore, the group agreed that while combating corrupt
activities by judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials, it is vital to take into consideration the manyfactors that could affect the official concerned, i.e. the political background of the country, financial situation,culture, etc.

329

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80

The swift and speedy disposition of corruption cases was discussed as a matter of high priority.
Nevertheless, while doing so, it was agreed that officials must consider, the complexity of such cases,
the difficulty of collecting evidence and successfully prosecuting the accused. Therefore, speed and swift
disposition must not be at the expense of collecting sufficient evidence and hence, successful prosecution.
2. Main Causes of Corruption
Low remuneration was identified as a cause of corruption. The meaning of ‘low remuneration’ wasdiscussed in great depth. While members agreed that low remuneration does cause corruption, they
disagreed about the degree of this cause.
The group discussed deeply the meaning of ‘minimum living standard’ and it was observed that the above
term does not intend to give a specific standard; however, it could be interpreted as ‘a living standard that isacceptable to a person of his or her stature in the society’.
Many arguments were raised about the level of remuneration and the relationship between the salary andliving standards of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials and the national average wage. It wasagreed that the salary of a judge, prosecutor/law enforcement official should rather be compared with that ofa civil servant of the same rank and stature and/or should be sufficient to maintain a minimum standard ofliving.
The group also discussed the following issues as other major factors resulting in corruption by public
officials: social and cultural values towards corruption; weak laws, and their weak implementation; more
discretionary power and weak monitoring systems; and inconsistency of applicable laws.

B. Legal Ethics, Deontology, Professional Responsibilities and Codes of Conduct in the Judiciary,
Prosecutorial and Law Enforcement Authorities
Legal ethics, deontology, professional responsibilities and codes of conduct vary in different countries.
Different countries had different reasons to adopt or not adopt a code of conduct for officials. This has historicaland social explanations.
The group then assumed and discussed a code of conduct for judges, prosecutors and law enforcement
officials of an imagined new county. The pros and cons of establishing and implementing a code of conduct
were widely discussed. However, for the new country, it was agreed that a code of conduct was needed toprevent and deter criminal justice officials from becoming involved in corruption and to maintain publicconfidence in the criminal justice system.
It was discussed that a capacity assessment of the judiciary, prosecution service and police service must
be conducted before attempting to establish such a code to achieve the best possible discipline among
criminal justice officials.
1. Code of Conduct for Judges
A code of conduct for judges should include all the principles stipulated in the Bangalore Principles ofJudicial Conduct. However, it should be amended in a way that would suit the new country. The code of conduct
should be ‘localized’. The group discussed the hierarchy of the principles. Some members argued that someprinciples may be more important and therefore prioritized, while other members argued that only a someone
with all the values will make a good judge.

(i) Independence
Judges must be independent in judicial work from the legislative and executive branches of government,
other institutions and judicial colleagues. Additionally, a judge may be encouraged to discuss judical matters,with colleagues, but must not be influenced in any way whatsoever by his or her colleagues.
(ii) Impartiality and Integrity
A judge must maintain a high level of integrity. Judges should not be biased while executing their duty.
The decision-making process must also be seen to be unbiased, impartial, just and fair.

330

143RD INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE(iii) Propriety
Judges must maintain a lifestyle becoming of judges. Judges must restrict themselves from social
activities that may damage the judiciary’s reputations for propriety.
(iv) Equality, Competence and Diligence
Judges must deal fairly, equally and respectfully with everyone, including but not limited to prosecutors,defence lawyers, colleagues, staff and subordinates. Judges must not, by words or by action, portray his or her
opinion on a matter that may end up in his or her court. Judges must also make an effort to remain competentand diligent. Judges should be encouraged to attend training and refresher programmes.
2. Code of Conduct for Prosecutors
Prosecutors play a vital role in the administration of the criminal justice system. Prosecutors have a duty
to ensure that the fundamental human rights of the citizens are observed at all times. Therefore, prosecutors
should maintain ethical behaviour. The following principles can be identified as minimum standards of ethicalconduct by prosecutors.

(i) Professional Conduct and Competency
Prosecutors, as practitioners of criminal law, must at all times be well informed of all recent developments in thelegal framework, including a thorough knowledge of criminal procedure codes, evidentiary laws and fundamental
human rights of the citizens.
(ii) Independence
As the use of prosecutorial discretion is a wide power given to prosecutors, to ensure that this discretionary
power is used in a fair, consistent and legally sound manner, prosecutors must be independent from any
political or other sorts of influence.
(iii) Impartiality
Prosecutors must perform their duties without favour, prejudice or fear. Prosecutors must remain calm
at all times and carry out their duties impartially and objectively, according to their jurisdiction’s laws andregulations.
(iv) Role in Criminal Proceedings
Prosecutors, as the representative of the public interest must ensure that the defendant receives fairtreatment during the criminal proceedings. Prosecutors must also guarantee that prosecution evidence
submitted to court is sufficient and has been legally obtained. As the defenders of the public interest,
prosecutors must not only consider the rights of the victims, but the rights of the greater community as well.
(v) Co-operation
Prosecutors play an important part in criminal proceedings. However, the prosecutor’s work shall be
supplemented by the work of law enforcement officials. Therefore, the co-operation between prosecutors andthe law enforcement officials must be maintained at all times. Prosecutors must also maintain a professional
courteous relationship with courts, defence lawyers and all other relevant parties in the criminal justicesystem, to realize that justice is served fairly and in an expeditious manner to all parties involved in criminal
proceedings.
3. Code of Conduct for Law Enforcement Officials (Police)
While establishing a code of conduct for police officials, the group discussed the importance which mustbe given to honesty, integrity and the spirit of sacrifice. Moreover, given global nature of police work, thecode must comply with international best practices as each police force will have to co-operate with otherinternational organizations in fulfilling its duties.

(i) Honesty, Integrity, Confidentiality and Spirit of Sacrifice
Police officials must be honest, maintain high integrity and be willing to, made sacrifices while fulfilling
their duties. This is more relevant to police as police are the ‘face’ of the criminal justice system and fightcrimes on a day-to-day basis. Police also receive information of a classified nature from different sources.
Misuse of this police intelligence may result in major breach of public confidence in the criminal justicesystem.

331

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.80(ii) Fairness, Tolerance, Appearance and Impairment
Police must be fair and must be able to tolerate any amount of difficulty (humiliation, violence, etc)
during the performance of their duties. Police must not react to violent actions by criminal elements. On
the contrary, police should remain calm at all times and maintain high level of personal conduct and goodappearance. Law enforcement officials must not be under the influence of drugs and alcohol while on duty.
(iii) Use of Force, Abuse of Authority and Lawful OrderThe nature of police work includes using of force against citizens. It is important to make sure that thisforce is only to the limit required. The police must not abuse their power in any way. Fighting corruption in
the police must be the focus of this principle.
(iv) Co-operation and PartnershipAs the police get involved in dealing with international crime that which causes economic and socialproblems, it is important for them to deal in a friendly manner with foreign police to achieve investigative
success.

C. Other Measures to Prevent Corruption in the Judicial, Prosecutorial and Law Enforcement
Authorities
The group agreed that implementation of the code of conduct shall play an important role in fighting
corruption of public officials of the criminal justice system. Therefore, it was suggested that, during thedrafting of the code of conduct, judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials must be actively involved
and widely consulted. This is to ensure ownership of the code.
Thereafter, comprehensive training must be provided to facilitate complying with the code of conduct.
Training must include discussion of real-time issues and problems. Adult learning mechanisms should beemployed. Specialized experts may be employed to advise judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials
on ethics and codes of conduct. Continuous training and refresher courses shall be conducted throughout
the year. The public shall also be informed about the code of conduct of the criminal justice system officials.
Additionally, the group agreed that along with a written code of conduct, the traditions and work culture ofjudges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials shall be given priority.
Mechanism: an independent committee/authority must be established within each respective organization
to ensure compliance with the code of conduct.

D. Appointment, Education and Training
The group agreed that selection of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials should be based on
merit. Integrity of the applicant should be considered too. As for education and training, the group agreed
that the lecture-based education only may not be sufficient. Therefore, adult learning methods (Experience
Exchange, Sharing) should be deployed. Continuous legal training on ethics and codes of conduct must also
be conducted. A separate officer or officers may be employed to advise the officials continuously on the codeof conduct and ethical behaviour.
E. Procedural Regulations
The group did not discuss in depth the issues of procedural regulations as it was understood that all thecountries represented had sufficient procedural regulations stipulated in their respective constitutions andlocal procedural laws. Issues relating to recusal were also addressed in most jurisdictions. In countries that
do not have recusal arrangements written in procedural regulations, it was observed that they had strong
unwritten customs, traditions and practices that worked to avoid any possible conflict of interests. However,
the effective implementation of the procedural regulations was raised as a concern and more work needs tobe done on this aspect.
III. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION
Upon discussion, it was observed by the group that the international covenants and instruments that
relate to codes of conduct and ethical behaviour of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials are
merely minimum standards (as it is the nature of any international instrument). The group observed that332

143RD INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSEREPORTS OF THE COURSE

there are certain values that may be considered common values among the officials of the criminal justicesystem. However, the aspect and the mission of each organization and their values will differ and therefore
have differing impacts.
Following their comprehensive discussion, the group was unanimous that a written code of conduct forjudges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials was indeed important to fight corruption and unethicalconduct of officials of the criminal justice system. The code should reflect the aspirations of the citizens
towards criminal justice. It should also incorporate the country’s traditional values and social and culturalvalues. It should also address the historical events that might have led to the establishment of the code ofconduct. The code of conduct must be coupled with efforts to train officials, on a continuous basis, on thecodes of conduct and ethical behaviour, with constant advisory support and harsh punishments in the event ofviolation of the code.
The work of judges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials and the decisions made by them affect thedaily life of citizens. High levels of ethical behaviour, equality and fairness in performance of the duties ofjudges, prosecutors and law enforcement officials are not only a favorable qualities but it can considered aright of all citizens.

333