ISSN 1020-914X

UNAFEI

NEWSLETTERUNITED NATIONS ASIA AND FAR EASTINSTITUTE FOR THE PREVENTION OF CRIME
AND THE TREATMENT OF OFFENDERS

No. 126
August 2008

Established1961
IN THIS ISSUE
Page

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR ............................................................................................................................... 1

THE 139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE ............................................................................................. 4

PROFILES AND EFFECTIVE TREATMENTS OF SERIOUS AND VIOLENT JUVENILE OFFENDERS
Course Rationale ............................................................................................................................................ 4
Course Summary ............................................................................................................................................ 7
Lecture Topics ................................................................................................................................................ 8
Individual Presentation Topics ....................................................................................................................... 11Group Workshop Sessions ............................................................................................................................. 13
Observation Visits .......................................................................................................................................... 16Group Study Tour ........................................................................................................................................... 17
Special Events ................................................................................................................................................ 18
Reference Materials ....................................................................................................................................... 20
Experts and Participants List .......................................................................................................................... 22

THE FOURTH SEMINAR ON CRIMINAL JUSTICE FOR CENTRAL ASIA ......................................................... 25
THE THIRTEENTH SPECIAL SEMINAR FOR SENIOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICIALS
OF THE PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA ............................................................................................................... 27
THE THIRD COUNTRY SPECIFIC TRAINING COURSE ON REVITALIZINGTHE VOLUNTEER PROBATION AIDE PROGRAMME FOR THE PHILIPPINES ................................................. 29
INFORMATION ABOUT FORTHCOMING PROGRAMMES .................................................................................. 31
The Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries ................................................... 31
The 140 th International Training Course ....................................................................................................................... 31

ADMINISTRATIVE NEWS ......................................................................................................................................... 36
Faculty Changes ............................................................................................................................................................ 36
Overseas Trips by Staff .................................................................................................................................................. 36
FACULTY & STAFF OF UNAFEI ............................................................................................................................... 37

UNAFEI IS AN AFFILIATED REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1-26, HARUMI-CHO, FUCHU, TOKYO 183-0057, JAPANTEL: 81-42-333-7021 ◆ FAX: 81-42-333-4656 ◆ E-MAIL: unafei@moj.go.jp
HOME PAGE: http://www.unafei.or.jp/

1

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR

It is my privilege to inform readers of the successful completion of the 139th International
Training Course on "Profiles and Effective Treatments of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders",
which took place from 19 May to 27 June 2008.
In this Course, we welcomed eight Japanese and sixteen overseas participants: eight from
Asia, five from Latin America and the Caribbean, and three from Africa. They included corrections officers, police officers, judges and other high-ranking public officials.
As this newsletter demonstrates, the Course was extremely productive. It consisted of individual presentations, group workshop and plenary sessions, visits to relevant criminal justice agencies and presentations by visiting experts, faculty members and ad hoc lecturers.
Juvenile justice systems vary from country to country and it is common for most countries
to apply a system different from that applied to adults. However, in instances where juveniles
commit very serious and violent offences, many countries do apply the same justice process asthat applied to adult penal trials. Such an approach is taken in the interests of the protection of
victims, the protection of society, and punitive viewpoints. Even in such serious cases however,
we cannot lose sight of the fundamental philosophy of juvenile justice: the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders.
The United Nations has tried to establish rules and regulations for the purpose of proper
juvenile justice administration and treatment. "The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for
the Administration of Juvenile Justice" (The Beijing Rules) outlines basic philosophies such as respecting human rights, pursuing the best interest of juveniles and exploiting social resources, andespecially, promoting diversion systems.1
This rule, together with "The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child"2 and"The United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency" (The Riyadh
Guidelines),3 provides that treatment programmes in the community must be prioritized because of
their protective and rehabilitative value and that treatment in institutions must be the last resort.
"The United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty"4 was enacted
to prevent inappropriate treatments and the infringement of the human rights of juveniles.
More than that, the United Nations recognizes the importance of the development of effective treatment programmes for those accommodated in institutions. Paragraph 9 of resolution
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (The Beijing
Rules) (1985)
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/40/a40r033.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
2 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989),
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/44/a44r025.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
3 United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Guidelines) (1990)
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/45/a45r112.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
4 United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty (1990)
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/45/a45r113.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
1

2

45/113 (1990) of the UN General Assembly asserts that it is indispensable for Member States toconsider treatment methods for serious and persistent young offenders and requests the UN
Secretary-General to report the results of considerations at the Ninth UN Congress on thePrevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders.
At the Ninth Congress, Member States discussed the treatment of serious and persistent juvenile offenders at workshop sessions and tried to analyse background factors and practical methods for treatment. According to the background paper of the workshop,5 it is highly possible forthose who have had traumatic experiences like physical or mental abuse, neglect, or inconsistentdiscipline to commit very atrocious and violent crimes during puberty or early adulthood. Other
contributing factors are exposure to materials depicting violence, rapid industrialization and urbanization, and personality disorders or developmental disorders.
The UN Member States have tried to solve these problems; however, the problem of violent crime committed by juveniles remains. There is an urgent need for us to establish proper justice systems and to implement effective assessment and treatment methods for these serious andcritical cases.
UNAFEI, as a regional institute of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice Programme Network, decided to hold this Course in order to provide an opportunity forjuvenile criminal justice personnel to consider the various issues for the purpose of clarifying challenges and discovering solutions suitable for their own countries.
During the Course the participants diligently and comprehensively examined the current
situation of juvenile justice in the participating countries, primarily through a comparative analysis.
The participants shared their own experiences and knowledge of the issues, and identified problems and areas in which improvements could be made. After engaging in in-depth discussions with
the UNAFEI faculty and visiting experts, the participants were able to put forth effective and practical solutions that could be applied in their respective countries.
I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to all the participants upon their successful
completion of the Course, made possible by their strenuous efforts. My heartfelt gratitude goes tothe visiting experts and ad hoc lecturers who contributed a great deal to the Course’s success.
Furthermore, I appreciate the indispensable assistance and co-operation extended to UNAFEI byvarious agencies and institutions, which helped diversify the programme.
I would like to express my great appreciation to the Japan International Cooperation
Agency (JICA) for its immeasurable support throughout the Course. At the same time, a warm
tribute must be paid to the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF) and its branch organizations
for their substantial contributions to our activities. Lastly, I owe my gratitude to all the individuals
whose unselfish efforts behind the scenes contributed significantly to the successful realization ofthis Course.

5

Crime Prevention Strategies in Particular as Related to Crimes in Urban Areas and Juvenile andViolent Criminality, Including the Question of Victims: Assessment and New Perspectives.
(Background Paper for the workshop on urban policy and crime prevention of Ninth UN Congress on
the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders)(A/CONF. 169/10).
http://www.asc41.com/9th UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime/9th_congress.htm (accessed
February 5, 2008).

3

Upon returning to their home countries, I genuinely believe that, like their predecessors, thestrong determination and dedication of the participants will enable them to work towards the improvement of their respective nation’s criminal justice systems, and to the benefit of internationalsociety as a whole.
Finally, I would like to reiterate my best regards to the participants of the 139th
International Training Course. I hope that the experience they gained during the Course proves
valuable in their daily work, and that the bonds fostered among the participants, visiting experts
and UNAFEI staff will continue to grow for many years to come.

June 2008

Keiichi Aizawa
Director, UNAFEI

4

THE 139TH INTERNATIONAL TRAINING COURSE"Profiles and Effective Treatments of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders"

Course Rationale

Rationale
1. The participants of the 139th UNAFEI International Training Course discussed andlearned the models of juvenile justice systems and methods of assessment and treatment. Juvenile
justice systems vary from country to country, like the Child Welfare Model, which makes muchof juveniles’ education; the Justice Model, which emphasizes the due process of the law in juvenile cases; the Restorative Justice Model, which takes account of the victims’ viewpoints; or the
Crime Control Model, which makes much of social protection.6 However, it is common for mostcountries to apply a system different from that for adults. Although each country adopts its own
justice system specifically designed for the sound development of juveniles, in instances where juveniles commit very serious and violent offences, many of them need to apply the same justiceprocess as that applied to adult penal trials. They do this because they need to take into consideration the needs of juvenile offenders as well as the protection of victims, the protection of society, and punitive viewpoints.
Even in serious cases, we cannot lose sight of the fundamental philosophy of juvenile justice: the rehabilitation of juvenile offenders. The problem areas relevant to those serious crimes
have to be clarified in order to create proper justice systems and treatment programmes. The problems of juvenile offenders are seriously complicated, and are deeply rooted in their mental, psychological, family, school and social situations. It is our obligation to continue our efforts todiscover the causes of these problems and methods to solve them.
The United Nations has tried to establish rules and regulations for the purpose of proper
juvenile justice administration and treatment. "The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for
the Administration of Juvenile Justice" (The Beijing Rules) outlines basic philosophies such as respecting human rights, pursuing the best interest of juveniles and exploiting social resources, andespecially, promoting diversion systems.7 This rule, together with "The United Nations Convention
on the Rights of the Child"8 and "The United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile
Delinquency" (The Riyadh Guidelines),9 provides that treatment programmes in the community
Corrado, R. R., and Turnbull, S. D. (1992). A comparative examination of the Modified Justice Modelin the United Kingdom and the United States. In R. R. Corrado, N. Bala, R. Linden, & M. Le Blanc(Eds.), Juvenile justice in Canada: A theoretical and analytical assessment (pp. 75-136). Toronto, ON:
Buttersworth.
7 United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice (The Beijing
Rules) (1985)
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/40/a40r033.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
8 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989),
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/44/a44r025.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
9 United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency (Riyadh Guidelines) (1990)
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/45/a45r112.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
6

5

must be prioritized because of their protective and rehabilitative value and that treatment in institutions must be the last resort. Even though we understand that institutional treatment limits theliberty of juveniles, we sometimes need to utilize it in cases of deteriorated criminal tendencies
and other problems from which the juvenile may be suffering. "The United Nations Rules for theProtection of Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty"10 was enacted to prevent inappropriate treatments and the infringement of the human rights of juveniles. More than that, the United Nations
recognizes the importance of the development of effective treatment programmes for those accommodated in institutions. Paragraph 9 of resolution 45/113 (1990) of the UN General Assembly,
which adopted the rule, asserts that it is indispensable for Member States to consider treatment
methods for serious and persistent young offenders and requests the UN Secretary-General to report the results of considerations at the Ninth UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders. That is to say, the UN asserts that Member States need to recognize theimportance of considering how to utilize institutional treatments effectively when they must accommodate serious and persistent juveniles in institutions.
At the Ninth Congress, Member States discussed the treatment of serious and persistent juvenile offenders at workshop sessions and tried to analyse background factors and practical methods for treatment. According to the background paper of the workshop,11 it is highly possible forthose who have had traumatic experiences like physical or mental abuse, neglect, or inconsistentdiscipline to commit very atrocious and violent crimes during puberty or early adulthood. As forsocial factors, the background paper pointed out that a flood of harmful and violent visualprogrammes would be the cause of arbitrary rationalization by juveniles that violent behaviour isa useful solution to problems. Also, globalization inflicts rapid industrialization and urbanization,
due to which traditional community ties, morals and cultures have seriously deteriorated. As forproblems implicit in the mental and inner world, the report pointed out the risks from those suffering from personality disorders or developmental disorders. Behaviour and attitude patterns inparticular, like antisocial behaviour, cognitive as well as behavioural impulsivities and cognitive
perversion, are highly related to violent crimes and so it is indispensable to analyse these characteristics for the development of effective treatment programmes.
The UN Member States have tried to solve these problems; however, there remain many
violent crimes committed by juveniles all over the world, like terrorism, child abuse, domestic violence, gun massacres, gang conflicts, and so on. There is an urgent need for us to establish proper
justice systems and to implement effective assessment and treatment methods for these serious andcritical cases. In this UNAFEI training course, we are going to examine the following topics forthe development of effective measures.
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)

Justice Models and Procedures
Assessment Methods
Treatment Methods
Prevention Methods

United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of Their Liberty (1990)
http://www.un.org/documents/ga/res/45/a45r113.htm (accessed February 5, 2008).
11 Crime Prevention Strategies in Particular as Related to Crimes in Urban Areas and Juvenile andViolent Criminality, Including the Question of Victims: Assessment and New Perspectives.
(Background Paper for the workshop on urban policy and crime prevention of the Ninth UN Congresson the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders)(A/CONF. 169/10).
http://www.asc41.com/9th UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime/9th_congress.htm (accessed
February 5, 2008).
10

6

UNAFEI, as a regional training institute of the United Nations, aimed to provide the participants of the 139th International Training Course with opportunities to be exposed to the issues
mentioned above for the purpose of clarifying problematic areas and discovering solutions for serious and violent juvenile offenders in their own countries. The following were concrete discussion
topics.
1.

2.

3.

Issues and methods of criminal investigation and prosecution in the case of serious and violent juvenile offenders:(a) Investigation and prosecution systems with consideration for the protection of juvenile offenders;(b) Judicial systems with consideration for the protection of juvenile offenders:(i) Characteristics of juvenile justice systems for serious and violent cases;(ii) Pre-trial criminal investigations systems, social inquiry systems, psychological assessment systems;(iii) Adjudication and treatment appropriate for serious and violent juvenile offenders.
Effective institutional treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders:(a) Problems and challenges of assessment techniques, psychological testing, risk-need assessment, interview techniques;(b) Effective treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders;(c) Treatment programmes taking into consideration the victim’s viewpoints;(d) Problems and challenges of through-care programmes.
Effective community treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders:(a) Problems and challenges of continuous treatment programmes from institutional care:(i) Problems and challenges of development of treatment programmes in accordance withassessment results;(ii) Treatment programmes based on the achievement levels of institutional programmes.
(b) Effective community treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders;(c) Relationships with other organizations for effective community treatment;(d) Crime prevention programmes in the community:(i) Screening risk factors in early childhood;(ii) Effective treatment programmes for high risk boys and girls.

7

Course Summary

Lectures
In total, six lectures were presented by visiting experts, ten by ad hoc lecturers and sevenby the faculty of UNAFEI. Three distinguished criminal justice practitioners from abroad served
as UNAFEI visiting experts. They lectured on issues relating to the main theme, and contributed
significantly to the Course by encouraging discussions after their own lectures, participating in thediscussions of other programmes, and conversing with the participants on informal occasions.
Additionally, distinguished senior officials of the Government of Japan delivered ad hoc lectures.
The lecturers and lecture topics are listed on pages 8 to 10.
Individual Presentations
During the first two weeks, each Japanese and overseas participant delivered an individual
presentation, which introduced the actual situation, problems and future prospects of his or her
country. These papers were compiled onto a compact disc and distributed to all the participants.
The titles of these individual presentation papers are listed on pages 11 to 12.
Group Workshop Sessions
Group Workshop sessions further examined the sub-topics of the main theme. In order to
conduct each session effectively, the UNAFEI faculty selected individuals to serve as group members for the sub-topics, based on their response to a questionnaire previously distributed. Selectedparticipants served as chairpersons, co-chairpersons, rapporteurs or co-rapporteurs and faculty members served as advisers. Each group’s primary responsibility was to explore and develop their designated topics in the group workshop sessions. The participants and UNAFEI faculty studied the
topics and exchanged their views based on information obtained through personal experience, theindividual presentations, lectures and so forth. After the group workshop sessions, reports weredrafted based on the discussions in their groups. These reports were subsequently presented in theplenary meeting and report-back session, where they were endorsed as the reports of the Course.
Brief summaries of the group workshop reports are provided on pages 13 to 15.
Visits and Special Events
Visits to various agencies and institutions in Japan helped the participants obtain a morepractical understanding of the Japanese criminal justice system. In addition to the Course’s academic agenda, many activities were arranged to provide a greater understanding of Japanese society and culture, with the assistance of various organizations and individuals, including the Asia
Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF). For more detailed descriptions, please refer to pages 16 to19.

8

Lecture Topics

Visiting Experts’ Lectures
1)

Dr. Robert Hoge
• Issues in the Assessment of Juvenile Offenders: Part I• Issues in the Assessment of Juvenile Offenders: Part II

2)

Dr. Joseph Ozawa• Juvenile Justice: A study of National Judiciaries for the United Nations Asia and Far East
Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders

3)

Mr. Ian Blakeman• The Youth Justice System of England and Wales

UNAFEI Professors’ Lectures
1)

Mr. Junichiro Otani, Professor, UNAFEI• The Criminal Justice System in Japan: Prosecution

2)

Mr. Shintaro Naito, Professor, UNAFEI• The Criminal Justice System in Japan: The Courts

3)

Mr. Jun Oshino, Professor, UNAFEI• An Overview of the Juvenile Justice System in Japan: The Courts

4)

Mr. Tetsuya Sugano, Professor, UNAFEI• Institutional Corrections in Japan (Juvenile Institutions)5)

Ms. Tae Sugiyama, Professor, UNAFEI• Community Based Treatment of Offenders in Japan6)

Mr. Haruhiko Higuchi, Professor, UNAFEI• Challenges of the Koban (Police Box) System in the 21st Century

7)

Mr. Takeshi Seto, Deputy Director, UNAFEI• The UN and Juvenile Justice9

Ad Hoc Lectures
1)

Dr. Hiroshi Tomita
Psychiatrist, Medical Affairs Section, National Musashino Gakuin• Characteristics and Effective Treatment of Children Committing Serious Crimes and Violent
Children2)

Mr. Yuzuru Kawabe
Director of Classification Division, Fuchu Prison• Mechanism, Profile and Assessment of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offences

3)

Professor Keiko Honda
Professor, Faculty of Education and Integrated Arts and Sciences, Waseda University• How to Implement Anger Management Processes for Violent People?

4)

Dr. Yuusuke Okamura
Deputy Warden, Medical Department, Fuchu Prison• Mental, Behavioural, and Physical Characteristics and Effective Treatment Methods ofSerious and Violent Juvenile Offenders

5)

Mr. Masayuki Oguri
Psychiatrist, Superintendent, Miyagawa Medical Juvenile Training School• Effective Treatment Methods for Juveniles Difficult to Treat

6)

Mr. Shun Ashizawa
Chief Family Court Investigator, Tokyo Family Court• The Role of Family Court Investigators in the Investigation of Serious and Violent Juvenile
Offences

7)

Mr. Masanobu Fukuta
Director, Juvenile Protection Office, National Police Agency• Present Conditions of Juvenile Delinquency and Police Measures

8)

Mr. Manabu Kato
Judge, Tokyo Family Court• Current Situation of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders in Japan9)

Ms. Keiko Masaki
Assistant to the Chief of the Secretariat, General Affairs Division, Kinki Regional Parole
Board• Community Based Treatment in Cases Where Juveniles Have Committed Heinous Crimes1010) Mr. Naoki Koshiba
Chief Specialist, Rehabilitation Section, Naniwa Juvenile Training School• Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders: The Responsibility of Adults

11

Individual Presentation Topics

Overseas Participants1)

Ms. Claudina Josette Nathaniel-Morgan (Antigua and Barbuda)• Towards Crime Prevention in Antigua and Barbuda - A Special Focus on Juveniles

2)

Ms. Salma Begum (Bangladesh)• Juvenile Justice System: Bangladesh Perspective

3)

Mr. Wangdi Tshering (Bhutan)• Crime Prevention - Treatment of Offenders: Profiles and Effective Treatments of Serious
and Violent Juvenile Offenders

4)

Ms. Gloria Barakanye Dithupa (Botswana)• Profiles and Effective Treatments of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders

5)

Mr. Barakanye Kootsene (Botswana)• Treatment of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders

6)

Mr. Marcelo Eustaquio Goncalves Cesário (Brazil)• Brazilian Justice System for Juvenile Delinquency: An Overview of the Statute of the Childand Adolescent7)

Dr. Álvaro Burgos (Costa Rica)• Treatment for Juvenile Sex Offenders as a True Alternative to Imprisonment in Costa Rica

8)

Mr. Alain-Bertin Tobunelo Bekolo (Democratic Republic of Congo)• Profiles and Effective Treatment of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders in the
Democratic Republic of Congo9)

Ms. Ina Rose Hunter (Jamaica)• The Profile and Treatment of Serious Juvenile Offenders in Jamaica10) Mr. Hazem Naeem Al Smadi (Jordan)• The Juvenile Justice System in Jordan in Light of United Nations Standards11) Ms. Grace Yerro Naparato (Philippines)• The Philippine Setting in the Context of the Juvenile Justice System
12) Ms. Korakod Narkvichetr (Thailand)• Juvenile Crime and Treatment of Serious and Violent Juvenile Delinquents in Thailand13) Ms. Gonna Satayathum (Thailand)• A Study on the Implementation of Family Group Conferences in Solving Crimes
Committed by Juvenile Offenders in Thailand
14) Mr. Fernando Oscar Viera Rivero (Uruguay)• Overview of Juvenile Offenders Justice Procedures in Uruguay

12

Observers15) Mr. Chi-Wai Samuel Tong (Hong Kong)• Profiles and Treatment of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders16) Mr. Jaemyung Jung (Korea)• Profiles and Effective Treatment of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders

Japanese Participants17) Mr. Hideaki Gunji• Juvenile Criminal Procedure in Japan18) Ms. Mayu Hayashi• Effective Institutional Programmes for Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders19) Ms. Naoko Naito• The State Appointed Attendant System for Specific Serious Juvenile Offence Cases
20) Mr. Kotaro Nakamura• Investigation of Juvenile Crime
21) Mr. Masaru Takahashi• Assessment of Juvenile Offenders at Juvenile Classification Homes in Japan22) Ms. Akiko Tashiro• Effective Community Treatment Programmes for Violent Juvenile Offenders in the
Probation Office23) Ms. Kazumi Watanabe• On Appropriate Assessments of Serious Juvenile Offenders in the Family Court24) Mr. Yoshihiro Uchida• The Planning of Facilities for Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders13Group Workshop Sessions

Group 1ISSUES AND METHODS OF CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION, PROSECUTION,
AND JUDICIAL PROCEDURES FOR SERIOUS AND VIOLENT JUVENILE
OFFENDERS
Chairperson
Co-chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members

Visiting Expert
Advisers

Mr. Hideaki Gunji
Ms. Gonna Satayathum
Mr. Marcelo Eustaquio Goncalves Cesário
Mr. Fernando Oscar Viera Rivero
Mr. Hazem Naeem Al Smadi
Ms. Naoko Naito
Mr. Kotaro Nakamura
Dr. Robert Hoge
Prof. Jun Oshino
Prof. Shintaro Naito
Prof. Junichiro Otani
Prof. Haruhiko Higuchi(Japan)(Thailand)(Brazil)(Uruguay)(Jordan)(Japan)(Japan)(Canada)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

ReportGroup One divided its discussion of the theme into two distinct areas: i) investigation; andii) the judicial system. Each area was further sub-divided, allowing the Group to focus on thevarious stages of investigation and court proceedings, and drawing on the professional expertise of
the Group Members. Particular consideration was given to the best methods of interviewing andassessing juveniles, deciding on the necessity of detention, and the preservation of familial privacy
and relationships.
The Group made the following recommendations. Regarding the investigation procedure: 1.
Juvenile offenders should be interviewed in a segregated place, separated from other juveniles, witnesses, or the victim. 2. It is desirable that criminal justice officials who deal with juveniles be
specially trained. 3. Whether or not the juvenile’s parents may be present should be decided in thebest interests of the juvenile and the best interests of the investigation. 4. Bearing in mind the different needs and practices in each country, the period of detention should be as short as possible.
5. The decision to detain a juvenile must balance the protection of society and the protection of
the juvenile. 6. With due regard to the gravity of the alleged crime, the decision should reflect
the authority’s concern for the juvenile. 7. Behavioural and psychological analysis should be integral elements of the investigation. 8. The privacy of the juvenile, his or her family, as well as theintegrity of the investigation, should be protected. 9. A complete report of the investigation should
be forwarded to the relevant authority.
Regarding judicial procedure: 10. Rehabilitation and re-socialization should be the goal ofjuvenile justice. 11. The role and duties of parents are important, as is the family as an institution.
12. As each juvenile is an individual, the final disposition of the case should be based on a comprehensive social inquiry and psychological report. 13. The privacy of the juvenile and his or her
family should be carefully protected. 14. Victims should, at least, have the opportunity to voice
their concerns in court. 15. Detention should be for the minimum period sufficient to rehabilitate
the juvenile.

14Group 2
EFFECTIVE INSTITUTIONAL TREATMENT PROGRAMMES FOR SERIOUS
AND VIOLENT JUVENILE OFFENDERS
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members

AdvisersDr. Álvaro Burgos
Ms. Salma Begum
Ms. Claudina Josette Nathaniel-Morgan
Ms. Gloria Barakanye Dithupa
Mr. Wangdi Tshering
Mr. Jaemyung Jung
Ms. Mayu Hayashi
Mr. Masaru Takahashi
Mr. Yoshihiro UchidaProf. Tetsuya SuganoProf. Ryuji Tatsuya(Costa Rica)(Bangladesh)(Antigua and Barbuda)(Botswana)(Bhutan)(Korea)(Japan)(Japan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Report Summary
The agenda was as follows: i) problems and challenges of assessment techniques; ii) effective treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders; iii) treatment programmes
which consider the victim’s views; iv) problems and challenges of continuous treatment
programmes from institutional care to community treatment; and v) goals and needs to improve effective institutional treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders.
In considering each item of the agenda, the Group made careful comparisons of the current
systems of each participating country and identified five common challenges: i) an absence ofclear classification regulations; ii) the lack of physical infrastructure and financial resources; iii) an
insufficient number of institutional programmes which consider the views of victims; iv) a lack ofsystematic follow-up programmes; and v) inadequate information-sharing between institutional andcommunity treatment authorities.
The Group made the following recommendations. 1. The Group underlined the necessity ofidentifying the risk of reoffending and the needs of the targeted juvenile. 2. Juveniles should also
be assessed for mental disorders, maturity, and level of intellect. 3. Levels of offending behaviour
should be categorized to connect assessment and treatment. 4. Assessment should be conducted by
specialists from a range of disciplines. 5. Standardized assessment tools which are adaptive to different situations and combine both quantitative and qualitative methods should be introduced. 6.
Assessment methods should be properly selected and implemented. 7. Governments should allocate
the necessary human and financial resources to juvenile justice. 8. The minimum essential numberof institutions should be constructed. 9. Existing resources should be utilized to the best extent
possible. 10. All approaches should be culturally and socially sensitive. 11. The juvenile justicesystem should encompass the needs of the juvenile and the concerns of the victim, and should be
administered by qualified personnel in a consistent manner. 12. Consideration should be given tosystems of restorative justice to redress the harm that has been done to victims. 13. Developmentof programmes which integrate institutional and community-based treatment is recommended. 14.
An organization with responsibility for both institutional and community-based treatment is desirable. 15. Sharing information between related agencies should be facilitated by the development ofelectronic data network systems. 16. At an early stage of the period of incarceration, interventions
which prepare the juvenile for release should be applied.

15Group 3
EFFECTIVE COMMUNITY TREATMENT PROGRAMMMES FOR SERIOUS
AND VIOLENT JUVENILE OFFENDERS
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members

Visiting Expert
Advisers

Ms. Ina Rose Hunter
Mr. Barakanye Kootsene
Ms. Grace Yerro Naparato
Mr. Chi-Wai Samuel Tong
Mr. Alain-Bertain Tobunelo Bekolo
Ms. Korakod Narkvichetr
Ms. Akiko Tashiro
Ms. Kazumi Watanabe
Mr. Joseph Ozawa
Prof. Tae Sugiyama
Prof. Koji Yamada(Jamaica)(Botswana)(Philippines)(Hong Kong)(DR Congo)(Thailand)(Japan)(Japan)(Singapore)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Report SummaryGroup Three considered the above theme for juveniles who received non-custodial sentences as well as those released from institutions. The Group was also tasked with addressing the
problems and challenges of continuous treatment programmes, including assessing the achievementlevels of same; the relationships between criminal justice institutions, government agencies, andNGOs; and crime prevention strategies such as screening in early childhood and treatment for
high-risk children. The Group emphasized the importance of community-based treatment in theprevention of crime and highlighted the necessity of community support in this endeavour.
The Group made the following recommendations. 1. Every country should introduce noncustodial sentences and aftercare services for juveniles released from institutions. 2. Professionals
in each country should seek political support for community-based treatment systems through theintroduction of statistically proven research. 3. A network of NGOs, community groups and businesses should be established, with the dual aim of creating financial support for rehabilitation activities and employment opportunities for rehabilitated offenders. 4. Public awareness of the workof probation offices and social workers should be increased to ensure that sufficient numbers ofcompetent staff are recruited. 5. Extensive training should be provided for all officers, especiallythose who deal directly with juvenile offenders or children in conflict with the law. 6. The establishment of halfway houses, whether government run or supported by civil society, would ease theproblems of overcrowding, which hampers treatment programmes currently being implemented. 7.
Family-oriented policies should be implemented to create strong families which can support young
people. 8. An inter-agency committee which develops consistent treatment programmes, coordinates treatment and, with due respect for privacy, distributes information amongst social welfare services, correctional institutions and probation personnel, would aid the implementation ofeffective treatment programmes. 9. Juveniles should be individually analysed for risk and need levels and programmes should be tailored accordingly. 10. Vocational training should be relevant tothe current jobs market to increase employment opportunities. 11. Benchmarking should be utilized
to develop common assessment tools and gauge established practices and programmes in different
institutions. 12. High-risk families should be assisted by early intervention programming to assistin cultivating healthy family relationships.

16

Observation Visits

Date

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

May 28Musashino Gakuin• Mr Hitoshi Aizawa(Superintendent)

June 4

Tokyo Probation Office• Mr. Kazuo Kasahara(Director)

Tokyo District Prosecutors Office• Mr. Tetsuo Ito(Chief Prosecutor)

June 6

Kanagawa Medical Juvenile Training School• Dr. Makoto Sugita(Superintendent)

June 11

Tokyo Family Court• Mr Syouichi Yagi
(Deputy Chief Judge)

The Supreme Court• Mr. Tatsuo Kainaka(Justice)

Kawagoe Juvenile Prison• Atsushi Nakayama(Warden)June 16

17

Group Study Tour

Date

Location

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

June 19

Hiroshima

Hiroshima Juvenile Classification Home

• Mr. Kuniharu Ueda
(Superintendent)

June 20

Kyoto

Kyoto Prefectural Police

18

Special Events

May 19Welcome Party

May 21, 22, 23

Japanese Conversation Classes

The overseas participants attended three Japanese conversation classes and learned
practical Japanese expressions. The sensei (teacher) was Ms. Tomoko Toriya from JICE.
May 24Grand Sumo Tournament and Party hosted by the ACPF, Kisei-Kai Branch

The participants attended the Grand Sumo Tournament at the Ryogoku Kokugikan,
Tokyo, and later enjoyed a party hosted by the ACPF, Kisei-kai Brach, at the Daiiichi
Ryogoku Hotel.
May 31

Visit to Tokyo Horse Race Course

The participants were invited to attend Fuchu Horse Race Course as guests of theRotary Club of Fuchu.
May 29Social with Legal Trainees

The participants enjoyed a reception with trainees from the Legal Research andTraining Institute of the Supreme Court, hosted at UNAFEI.
May 30

UNAFEI Olympics

The UNAFEI Olympic Games were held on the grounds of the Training Institute for
Correctional Personnel. The participants competed in such events as a racket relay, tug ofwar, and true or false quiz. Afterwards, the participants enjoyed a party with UNAFEI staff
and faculty.
June 2Social with Volunteer Probation Officers
The participants had an opportunity to exchange views with Japanese Volunteer
Probation Officers at a social at UNAFEI.

June 4Courtesy Call to the Ministry of Justice andReception by the Vice-Minister of Justice
After visiting the Ministry of Justice a reception was held for the participants by theVice-Minister of Justice, Mr. Hiroshi Ozu, at the Lawyer’s Club, Tokyo.

June 7, 8Home Visits

The ACPF Fuchu Branch kindly organized dinners for the participants at the homesof their members. The hosts were Mr. Yoshiyuki Sakano, Mr. Rinshi Sekiguchi, Mr.
Shigeyuki Ogawa, Ms. Keiko Honda, Mr. Shoichi Tuchida, and Ms. Chitose Sashida.

19June 12

Yokohama Cruise

The participants enjoyed a sunset cruise and dinner aboard the Marine Rouge,
hosted by the ACPF Yokohama branch.
June 14

The Way of Tea

The participants enjoyed lunch at Tanaka House in Kyodo-no-Mori Park. This wasfollowed by "cha-no-yu" or "sado", a formal Japanese tea ceremony. These events werekindly hosted by Soroptimist International Tokyo, Fuchu.
June 16

ACPF Fuchu Branch Party

The ACPF Fuchu branch kindly organized an enjoyable party for the participants
and their host families at UNAFEI.
June 26

Farewell Party
A party was held to bid farewell to the participants.

20

Reference Materials

A.

UN Conventions, Standards and Norms in Juvenile Justice, and Related Materials

1.
2.
3.

9.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989
Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (1st UN Congress)
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Administration of Juvenile Justice, 1985
(Beijing Rules)
United Nations Guidelines for the Prevention of Juvenile Delinquency, 1990 (the Riyadh
Guidelines)
United Nations Rules for the Protection of Juveniles Deprived of their Liberty, 1990
Guidelines for Action on Children in the Criminal Justice System, 1997
Crime Prevention Strategies, in Particular as Related to Crimes in Urban Areas and Juvenile
and Violent Criminality, including the Question of Victims: Assessment and New Perspectives
United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for Non-Custodial Measures, 1990 (The Tokyo
Rules)
Juvenile Justice, Criminal Justice Assessment Toolkit, 2006, UNODC

B.

Juvenile Justice System

1.

Hoge, R.D. and Andrews, D.A. Assessing the Youthful Offender. New York, Plenum Press,
1986. Chapters 1-3 pp.1-42.
Loeber, L. and Farington, D. (Eds). Child Delinquents. California, Sage Publications Inc.,
2001. Chapter 13 pp. 305-322, Chapter 14 pp. 323-338.
Champion, D.J. The Juvenile Justice System. 2nd ed. New Jersey, Prentice Hall, Chapter 1 pp.
1-30, Chapter 3, pp.73-110.
Muncie, J. and Goldson, B. (Eds). Comparative Youth Justice. London, Sage Publications Inc.,
Chapter 2, pp. 19-33, Chapter 3, pp. 34-47, Chapter 8 pp. 111-126, Chapter 9, pp. 127-145,
Chapter 10, 146-158.
Corrado, R.R. Serious and Violent Young Offenders’ Decisions to Recidivate: An Assessmentof Five Sentencing Models. Crime and Delinquency, Vol. 49, No. 2, April 2003, pp. 170-200.
Japan. Juvenile Act and Rules of Juvenile Proceedings, Act No. 168 of July 15, 1948, as
amended.

4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

2.
3.
4.

5.
6.

C.

Assessment of Juvenile Offenders

1.

Hoge, R.D. and Andrews, D.A. Assessing the Youthful Offender. New York, Plenum Press,
1986. Chapters 4-6, pp. 43-78.
Hoge, R.D. The Juvenile Offender. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Chapter 6, pp.
153-192.
Gendreau, P., Goggin, C. and Little, T. Predicting Adult Offenders Recidivism: What Works!
Public Works and Government Services, Canada.
Taylor, G. Offender Needs Providing the Focus for Our Correctional Interventions.
Compendium 2000 on Effective Correctional Programming. Correctional Service of Canada.
Bonta, J. Offender Assessment: General Issues and Considerations Compendium 2000 on
Effective Correctional Programming. Correctional Service of Canada.
Borum, R. Assessing Violence Risk among Youth. Journal of Clinical Psychology, Vol. 56(2), pp. 1263-1288 (2000). Borum, R. Managing At-Risk Juvenile Offenders in the

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.

21

Community. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, Vol. 19 (1), (2003) pp. 114-137.
Webster, C.D., Douglas, K.S., Eaves, D., and Hart, S.D. HCR-20 Violence Risk Management
Companion Guide. Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University, 1997.
pp. 13-71.
8. Loeber, L. and Farington, D. Child Delinquents. California, Sage Publications, Inc, 2001.
Chapter 7-11, pp. 137-272.
9. Dahllberg, L.L., Toal, S.B., Swahn, M., and Behrens, C.B. Measuring Violence-RelatedAttitudes, Behaviours, and Influences Among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools.
2nd ed. Atlanta, GA, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury
Prevention and Control.
10. Borum, R., Bartel, P., and Forth, A. Manual for the Structured Assessment of Violence Risk
in Youth (SAVRY). University of South Florida, 2003. pp. 1-20.

7.

D.

Treatments of Juvenile Offenders

1.

Hoge, R. D. The Juvenile Offender. Boston, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2001. Chapter 8-10,
pp. 225-324.
Loeber, L., and Farington, D. Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders. California, Sage
Publications, Inc., 1999. Chapter 13-15, pp. 313-388.
Webster, C.D., Douglas, K.S., Eaves, D., and Hart, S.D. HCR-20 Violence Risk Management
Companion Guide. Mental Health, Law, and Policy Institute, Simon Fraser University, 1997.
pp. 73-160.
Eggert, L.L. Anger Management for Youth. National Educational Service, 1994.
Beck, A.T., and Freeman A. Cognitive Therapy of Personality Disorders. New York,
Guildford Press, 1990. pp. 3-78, pp. 147-175.
Leschied, A.W. Multisystemic Therapy: Community-Based Treatment for High Risk Young
Offenders UNAFEI Resource Material Series No.59. Tokyo, UNAFEI, 2002. pp. 54-82.

2.
3.

4.
5.
6.

E.

Prevention of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offences1.

Loeber, L., and Farington, D. Serious & Violent Juvenile Offenders. California, Sage
Publications, Inc., 1999. pp. 197-283.
Tonry, M., and Farrington, D. P. Building a Safer Society: Strategic Approaches to Crime
Prevention. London: The University of Chicago Press, Ltd., 1995. pp. 1-89.

2.

22

Experts and Participants List

Visiting Experts
Dr. Robert Hoge

Emeritus Professor of Psychology andDistinguished Research Professor
Carleton University
CanadaDr. Joseph Ozawa

Senior Deputy Director
Family and Juvenile Justice Centre
Subordinate Courts of Singapore

Mr. Ian Blakeman

Head of Group
Women and Young People’s GroupHM Prison Service
United Kingdom

Overseas Participants
Ms. Claudina Josette Nathaniel-Morgan

CorporalRape Unit CID
Royal Police Force
Antigua and Barbuda

Ms. Salma Begum

Additional Superintendent (Training)
Police Headquarters
Bangladesh

Mr. Wangdi Tshering

Staff Officer to Chief
Royal Bhutan Police
BhutanMs. Gloria Barakanye Dithupa

Superintendent
Prisoners Administration andRehabilitation
Botswana Prison Service
Botswana

Mr. Barakanye Kootsene

Senior Social Welfare Technician
Social and Community Development
North West District Council
Botswana

Mr. Marcelo Eustaquio GoncalvesCesário

Police Chief
Civil Police of the Federal District
Brasilia
Brazil23

Dr. Álvaro Burgos

Magistrate
Superior Juvenile Criminal Court
Costa Rica

Mr. Alain-Bertin Tobunelo Bekolo

Director Inspector of Scientific Field
Justice Department
Democratic Republic of Congo

Ms. Ina Rose Hunter

Educational Co-ordinator
Department of Correctional Services
Ministry of National Security
Jamaica

Mr. Hazem Naeem Al Smadi

Judge
Amman First Instance Court
JordanMs. Grace Yerro Naparato

Chief
Women and Child Protection Center
Police Regional Office
Calabarzon IV-A
Philippine National Police

Ms. Korakod Narkvichetr

Director
Nakornratchasima Probation Office
Department of Probation
Ministry of Justice
Thailand

Ms. Gonna Satayathum

Judge
Nakorn Panom Provincial Court
Juvenile and Family Division
Office of the Judiciary
Thailand

Mr. Fernando Oscar Viera Rivero

Assistant to Director
Police Instructor
National Police School
Uruguay

Observers
Mr. Chi-Wai Samuel Tong

Principal Officer
Correctional Service Department
Hong Kong

Mr. Jaemyung Jung

Correctional Supervisor
Prison Industry Section
Anyang Corrections Institution
Korea

24

Japanese Participants
Mr. Hideaki Gunji

Assistant Judge
Tokyo District Court

Ms. Mayu Hayashi

Chief Specialist
Haruna Juvenile Training School for Girls

Ms. Naoko Naito

Assistant Judge
Tokyo District Court

Mr. Kotaro Nakamura

Public Prosecutor
Toyama District Public Prosecutors Office

Ms. Akiko Tashiro

Probation Officer
Yokohama Probation Office

Mr. Masaru Takahashi

Chief Specialist
Chiba Juvenile Classification Home

Ms. Kazumi Watanabe

Family Court Probation Officer
Tokyo Family Court

Mr. Yoshihiro Uchida

Facilities Planning Officer
Facilities Division
Minister’s Secretariat
Ministry of Justice25

THE FOURTH SEMINAR ON CRIMINALJUSTICE FOR CENTRAL ASIA

The Fourth Seminar on Criminal Justice for Central Asia was held from 25 February to 14
March 2008 at UNAFEI. The Seminar was entitled "Countermeasures for Drug Offences andRelated Crimes and Treatment for Drug Abusers in the Criminal Justice Process". Fourteen participants attended.
Mr. Ametov Bek

Chairman of the CollegiumWest Kazakhstan Regional Court
Kazakhstan

Mr. Maksimgereev Baglan Alkenovich

Senior Public Prosecutor
General Prosecutor’s Office
Kazakhstan

Mr. Nurmukhamedov Marat Beibetovich

Senior Public Prosecutor
General Prosecutor’s Office
Kazakhstan

Mr. Yeshtay Akzhan

Judge
Supreme Court of Kazakhstan
Kazakhstan

Mr. Abdukul Uulu Mavlen

Head Division
Division on Legal Support
Analysis and Strategy Department
Ministry of Justice
Kyrgyzstan

Mr. Barannikov Sergey

Senior Officer/Investigator
Ministry of Internal Affairs
Kyrgyzstan

Mr. Dononbaev Marat

Prosecutor
Office of the General Prosecutor of the
Kyrgyz Republic
Kyrgyzstan

Mr. Tashkarev Kanat

Senior Investigator
Drug Control Agency of the Kyrgyz
Republic
Kyrgyzstan

Mr. Kamolov Saifiddin Ismonovich

Lawyer of Tursun Zadee
Court of Tursun Zadee
Tajikistan

26

Mr. Mirzoev Abdulhakim Latifovich

Vice Chief
Court of Ismoeru Somoni
Dushonhe City
Tajikistan

Mr. Okilov Bakhtiyor Davronovich

Head of the Kayrokhum Court
Court of Kayrokhum
Tajikistan

Mr. Shomusalomov Saidmusalam

ChairmanGorno-Badakhshan Autonomous Oblast
Court
Tajikistan

Mr. Hanmukamedov Begench
Amanmuhamedovich

Chief of Department
Investigative Department
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Turkmenistan

Mr. Egamberdiev Muzaffar
Shermamatovich

Head of Investigation Department
Prosecutors Office of Tashkent City
Uzbekistan

27

THE THIRTEENTH SPECIAL SEMINAR FOR
SENIOR CRIMINAL JUSTICE OFFICIALS OF
THE PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA

The 13th Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s Republic ofChina was held from 3 to 19 March 2008 at UNAFEI. Nine participants and two course
counsellors attended. The theme of the Seminar was "Reform of the Criminal Justice System:
Introducing the Views of Crime Victims and Improving Offender Treatment, Taking into Accountthe Risks and Needs of Offenders."
Mr. Zha Quingjiu

Vice Director
General Office
Ministry of Justice

Mr. Qi Tengjuan

Deputy Chief Prosecutor
The People’s Procuratorate of
Yunnan Province

Ms. Song Jinying

Programme Officer
Department of Judicial Assistance andForeign Affairs
Ministry of Justice

Mr. Li Shouwei

Director
Criminal Legislation Department
Legislative Affairs Commission
Standing Committee of NPC China

Mr. Huang Yong

Senior Section Member
Criminal Legislation Department
Legislative Affairs Commission
Standing Committee of NPC China

Mr. Li Ruiyi

Judge
Fifth Criminal Tribunal of the Supreme
People’s Court of the PR of China

Mr. Li Jian

Judge
Fourth Criminal Tribunal of the Supreme
People’s Court of the PR of China

Mr. Xu Chuangye

Division Chief of Office
The People’s Procuratorate of Chinqing

Mr. Fang Baofeng

PoliceLegal Affairs Department
Ministry of Public Security

28

Ms. Sun Jianying

Vice President
Institute of Judicial Administration
Ministry of Justice

Mr. Geng Zhichao

Division Director
Department of Judicial Assistance andForeign Affairs
Ministry of Justice29

THE THIRD COUNTRY SPECIFIC TRAINING
COURSE ON REVITALIZING THE
VOLUNTEER PROBATION AIDEPROGRAMME FOR THE PHILIPPINESThe Third Country Specific Training Course on Revitalizing the Volunteer Probation Aide
Programme for the Philippines was held from 15 to 25 April 2008. Twelve participants attended.
Mr. Rodolfo Pastor Pascua

Assistant Regional Director
Cordillera Administrative Region
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Ms. Cecilia Gaddi

Chief Administrative Officer
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Ms. Twila Garingan Dela Cruz

Chief Probation and Parole Officer
Boyombong City Parole and Probation
OfficeRegion 2
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Mr. Rene Saldon Remollo

Supervising Parole and Probation Officer
Tanjay City Parole and Probation Office
Region 7
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of JusticeMs. Hyacinth Verzosa Castanos

Supervising Probation and Parole Officer
Community Services Division
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Mr. Wilfred Dang-ao Gonnay

Supervising Probation and Parole Officer
Baguio City Parole and Probation Office
Cordillera Administrative Region
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Mr. Joel Romano Cabatos Arjinal

Senior Probation and Parole Officer
Santa Rosa City Probation Office
Region 4
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Mr. Juan Raymundo Claraval Angangan

Probation and Parole Officer II30

Cauayan City Parole and Probation
Office,Region 2
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice
Ms. Mary Ann Claver Aranca

Probation and Parole Officer II
Tabuk City Parole and Probation Office
Cordillera Administrative Region
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Mr. Gideon Michael Rodriguez Patricio

Volunteer Probation Aide
Roxas City
Region 6
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Mr. Margarito Tanagon Pacilan

Volunteer Probation Aide
Dapitan City
Region 9
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice

Ms. Virginia Matias Peralta

Volunteer Probation Aide
Santa Rosa City
Region 4
Parole and Probation Administration
Department of Justice31

INFORMATION ABOUT FORTHCOMING PROGRAMMES1.

The Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries
The Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries, entitled"Corruption Control in Public Procurement", will be held from 23 to 25 July 2008 in Bangkok,
Thailand. The Seminar will be co-hosted by UNAFEI, the Office of the Attorney General of
Thailand and the UNODC Regional Centre for East Asia and the Pacific. Participants from seven
Southeast Asian countries will attend.
The 140th International Training Course
The 140th International Training Course, entitled "The Criminal Justice Response to
Cybercrime" will be held from 1 September to 10 October 2008.
Rationale
1. The Increasing Threat of Cybercrime and the Necessity to Take Countermeasures
The revolution in information and communication technologies (ICT) is transforming society
and human life drastically and fundamentally. ICT, especially computers and computer networks,
are now considered indispensable resources for further development; they are seen as tools ofmanagement and communication in various social and economic activities.
Despite the tremendous benefits of ICT advancement, regrettably, it has also facilitatedvarious types of crimes, whether as the target of crime (e.g., unauthorized access and damage to,or the modification of, computer data or programmes) or as an instrument of crime (e.g., fraud,
forgery, child pornography, defamation, infringement of intellectual property). ICT advances giveopportunity not only to mischievous hackers to satisfy their personal interest in intrusive actions,but also to organized criminal groups to profit economically by identity theft, counterfeit creditcard fraud, illicit trafficking, etc. ICT can be used for identity-related wrongdoing, such as computer intrusion, phishing and skimming, not only endangering the privacy of individuals but also
creating potential for further economic crime. Illegal or harmful material, such as child pornography, as well as websites assisting violent crime, drug crime, economic crime and sex crime, or
websites promoting racism, terrorism or suicide, are now easily accessible. Cyber-attacks on infrastructure can have immediate and serious repercussions for national social and economic systems,
as well as profound transnational effects. Thus, cybercrime may in various ways threaten society
as a whole and human rights, including rights to property, privacy, dignity and even life.
In order to cope with such a situation, some characteristics of cybercrime (which is definedin this course as crimes in which computers or computer networks are the target or the instrument) should be noted. Cybercrime often involves invisible, intangible, volatile and changeable information data with advanced technology and a borderless network; therefore, investigators
sometimes face difficulties in tracing it. Internet anonymity may become a licence to lie. At low
risk to themselves and without any geographic or time constraints, cybercrime offenders may execute attacks causing instant harm to the general public. Copycat criminals are not uncommon.
These phenomena now pose significant problems in developed countries, and they also havecritical implications for developing countries. Cybercrime can now be committed from or throughjurisdictions which have at least minimal telecommunications services but have legal frameworks
and law enforcement infrastructure too weak to counter cybercrime. Countries where ICT technologies are being initially deployed and maintained may face threats for which they are unprepared.
In order to fully utilize ICT for the further development of society, building proper defences
against cybercrime is an inevitable challenge.
The threat posed by the proliferation of cybercrime to the sound development of individual
nations, as well as to the international community, has been underestimated. However, considering2.

32

the instant extensive damage that can be caused worldwide by crime facilitated by ICT, a properand immediate response by criminal justice agencies to cybercrime is indispensable. Nevertheless,since such crimes are relatively new to many countries, not every country has established the necessary legal frameworks. Even if such legal frameworks are effectuated, due to criminal justice officials’ limited knowledge of cybercrime and associated technological problems, difficulties willensue in the investigation, prosecution and adjudication of these crimes, in particular with theidentification of offenders and the collection of evidence. In addition, the complexity of the challenges specific to cybercrime necessitates international co-operation, which ultimately requires
countries to be equipped with the necessary legal, procedural and regulatory tools.
Thus, the appropriate stringent control and prevention measures for cybercrime should be
introduced as soon as possible. To this end, it is imperative for criminal justice agencies to understand thoroughly the current situation of cybercrime; to establish a proper legal framework to address such crimes; to develop more advanced techniques and tools commensurate with the natureof these crimes; and to enhance international criminal justice co-operation in this regard.
2.

International Efforts to Combat Cybercrime
Because of the borderless nature of cybercrime, many efforts have been made at various
levels for international harmonization or co-operation to tackle the issue. At the international level,
many organizations such as the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), theInternational Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), the Group of Eight (G8), the European Union(EU), the Council of Europe (CE), the Organization of American States (OAS) and Asia-Pacific
Economic Cooperation (APEC) provide the political and technical expertise necessary to foster international co-operation.
(i) Efforts by the United Nations
Beginning with the Eighth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders in 1990, the United Nations has been actively involved in addressing various aspects of computer-related developments. In 1994, the United Nations Manual on thePrevention and Control of Computer-related Crime was published. In 2000, the United Nations
Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI)
assisted with the organization and implementation of a workshop on crimes related to the computer network at the Tenth UN Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of
Offenders. The UN General Assembly invited States to take into account the measures to combat
computer misuse contained in its resolutions on Combating the Criminal Misuse of Information
Technology (55/63 (2000) and 56/121 (2001)). The United Nations Convention against
Transnational Organized Crime (UNTOC), which came into effect in 2003, indirectly deals withcybercrime when carried out by organized criminal groups. The Eleventh UN Congress on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice held a workshop on computer-related crime and adopted the"Bangkok Declaration" which welcomed efforts to enhance and supplement existing co-operation
to prevent, investigate and prosecute high-technology and computer-related crime and invited theCommission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice to examine the feasibility of providing further assistance in that area under the aegis of the United Nations in partnership with other similarly focused organizations. In 2007, the Sixteenth United Nations Commission on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice discussed identity-related fraud.
(ii) Other International Efforts
In 1997, the G8 established the Subgroup on High-Tech Crime under the framework of agroup of senior experts on transnational organized crime, known as the Lyon Group, and adopted
the Ten Principles in the Combat against Computer Crime, aiming to ensure that no such criminal
receives safe haven anywhere in the world. The G8 Subgroup on High-Tech Crime established andexpanded 24-Hour Contacts for International High-Tech and Computer-Related Crime, a list of

33

computer crime units available to law enforcement agencies 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
The Council of Europe (CE) opened the Convention on Cybercrime (2001) for signature by
Member States and selected non-member states in January 2001. The Convention, which took effect in 2004, is the first and currently only binding international instrument on this issue andserves as a framework for international co-operation between States Parties to this treaty and as
a guideline for any country developing comprehensive national legislation against cybercrime. It
requires States Parties to harmonize national laws that define substantive offences. These include(i) Offences against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems (illegal access, illegal interception, data/system interference, misuse of devices); (ii) Computer-related
forgery, computer-related fraud; (iii) Content-related offences (child pornography); and (iv)
Offences related to infringements of copyright. In 2004, the Convention’s Additional Protocol, concerning the criminalization of acts of a racist and xenophobic nature committed through a computer system, came into effect. In addition, the Convention requires an important set of procedural
powers, including production orders, preservation orders, search and seizure of stored computer
data, and real time collection of computer data. There are also provisions to establish a rapid andeffective system of international co-operation, including mutual assistance, and 24/7 networks andextradition.
In 2002, the Commonwealth Law Ministers adopted "The Model Law on Computer andComputer Related Crime", which shares a common framework with the Convention on
Cybercrime. In 2004, the Fifth Meetings of Ministers of Justice or of the Ministers or Attorneys
General of the Americas (REMJA V) recommended member states of the Organization ofAmerican States (OAS) to evaluate the advisability of implementing the principles of theConvention on Cybercrime (2001), and to consider the possibility of acceding to that Convention.
In 2005, the Sixth Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Ministerial Meeting on the
Telecommunications and Information Industry encouraged "all economies to study the Convention
on Cybercrime (2001) and to endeavour to enact a comprehensive set of laws relating to cybersecurity and cybercrime that are consistent with international legal instruments, including UN
General Assembly Resolution 55/63 (2000) and the Convention on Cybercrime (2001)." TheInternational Criminal Police Organization (Interpol), which has been providing technical guidancein cybercrime detection, investigation and evidence collection for law enforcement, including development of a 24/7 network, recommended the Convention on Cybercrime (2001) as providing
the international legal and procedural standard for fighting cybercrime at the 7th International
Conference on Cyber Crime.
In this context, for criminal justice authorities or legislators who wish to explore the way
to strengthen legal frameworks against cybercrime in respective countries, it is advisable to evaluate internationally developed materials such as guidelines, legal and technical manuals and model
legislation, especially the Convention on Cybercrime (2001).
With regard to criminalization, this Course will mainly deal with the most common typesof cybercrime which are stipulated in the Convention on Cybercrime (2001) and its Additional
Protocol, as a starting point for discussion. However, there are many other illegal or harmful activities in which computers and computer networks are used as targets or instruments. These include a range of fraudulent activities using ICT, such as auction fraud, non-delivery fraud, andsignificant increases in credit and debit card fraud. This course may discuss such kinds ofcybercrime in which ICT is the target or the tool of other crimes.
3.

Legal or Practical Issues in Investigation, Prosecution and Adjudication of Cybercrime
Needless to say, strengthening legal procedural tools and the capacity of law enforcement
to investigate cybercrime is a critical task in combating cybercrime; however, it is also importantthat the prosecutors who will bring those cases, and the judges who will hear those cases, understand the current situation and challenges in order to appropriately punish offenders and promote
confidence in the safety and security of the online environment.

34

In the investigation stage, strengthening mechanisms for gathering initial information on
cybercrime should be considered. Victims of cybercrime often encounter difficulties in where andhow to report the offences. Victims of content-related cybercrime such as child pornography usually have no opportunity to report the offences perpetrated against them. After acquiring initial information, a timely and appropriate response is indispensable to trace the source or the route of
the crime, to identify offenders and to collect evidence, since electronic evidence can be deleted
or destroyed more easily than physical documents. To do this effectively, investigators need to be
familiar with various types of cybercrime and related technologies and the government is required
to take measures to strengthen the capabilities of investigative authorities to combat cybercrime.
Without the necessary co-operation from other relevant private sector agents and technical experts,
including Internet service providers, it is difficult to preserve, collect and analyse intangible andvolatile digital evidence properly and without delay. In such a situation, whether, how, to what extent, and what kind of compulsory measures the investigative authority can use to preserve, collector analyse stored computer data (traffic data or content data), or computer data in real time, may
be the most critical issues. These critical issues include the necessity, target, scope and the methodof execution of a warrant for compulsory measures relating to large amounts of computer data, unanticipated data or encrypted data. On the other hand, in collecting digital evidence, due process
should be ensured, since such investigations often conflict with the right to privacy and other fundamental human rights. It should be noted that data collection and subsequent retention are
charged with the conflicting interests and values of various stakeholders, and it may be advisable
to seek a balance among the diverse legitimate interests.
Moreover, cybercrime easily crosses borders of jurisdiction and sovereignty; in such cases,
it is crucial for successful investigation to utilize international co-operation, including immediate
information sharing and mutual assistance among investigative authorities in different jurisdictions.
Ordinary bilateral mutual assistance is not sufficient to trace cybercrime across many jurisdictions.
If a case of cybercrime is serious enough, even extradition should be considered, which may raiseother issues such as dual criminality. For international co-operation to function effectively, substantive offences and procedural powers in one jurisdiction should be compatible with those in another. In this context, it is also advisable to assess the provisions of procedural law andinternational co-operation proposed in the Convention on Cybercrime (2001).
In the prosecution stage, many issues may arise in regard to substantive and/or procedurallaw, especially when prosecutors try to apply provisions designed for physical goods to the intangible and ephemeral world of digital goods. Prosecutors have to examine the interpretation carefully in deciding whether and whom to prosecute and must frame charges appropriately.
In the trial stage, difficulties in reconciling procedural law and digital evidence may arise.
In jurisdictions where there are strict rules governing the admissibility of evidence, or even in jurisdictions where there are no such explicit rules, disputes may arise as to whether or how judges
or fact finders can examine intangible data evidence. Cybercrime cases involving large volumes ofevidence may also pose new questions for practitioners. Cybercrime offences usually require criminal intent, and the way such intent is proved may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Since suchoffences are relatively new to judges, it is advisable to study trends and aggravating or mitigating
factors in sentencing in other jurisdictions in order to sentence cyber criminals appropriately.
We will focus on these legal and practical issues relating to cybercrime and explore effective measures to address them in this Training Course.
4.

Objectives
This Training Course aims at exploring ways to improve the criminal justice system tocombat cybercrime in the respective countries, by examining and analysing the current situation,
problems and challenges in regard to the following subtopics:(1) Current situation and issues in the respective countries of illegal or harmful activities in thefield of information and communication technology (ICT), especially concerning the

35criminalization of cybercrime (crimes in which computers or the computer network are thetargets or the instruments) listed below:(a) Offences defined in the Convention on Cybercrime (2001) and its Additional Protocol:• Offences against the confidentiality, integrity and availability of computer data and systems(illegal access, illegal interception, data/system interference, misuse of devices);• Computer-related forgery, computer-related fraud;• Content-related offences (child pornography, racism and xenophobia);• Offences related to infringements of copyright.
(b) Other offences in which computers or computer networks are the targets or the instruments(e.g. identity-related offences, fraud using the Internet, inducing or assisting violent, drug, economic or sex crimes using e-mails or websites, defamation).
(NB: for the purpose of preparing their individual presentation papers, participants are requested
to mention whether offences listed in (a) above are criminalized in their respective countries. In
regard to the definition of each offence, please refer to the Convention on Cybercrime (2001) and
its Additional Protocol.)(2) Legal or practical issues and measures for investigation, prosecution and adjudication of
cybercrime.
(a) Issues and measures concerning cybercrime investigation:(i) Initial information gathering (reporting system, cyber patrol, etc.);(ii) Tracing and identifying criminals (co-operation with other public/private agencies, establishing 24-hour co-operation networks, etc.);(iii) Preserving and collecting evidence (fair and timely search and seizure of stored computer
data (e.g. large amounts of data, unanticipated but related data, encrypted data), preservation, production or recovery of data, real-time collection of traffic data, interception of content data, etc);(iv) Digital forensic analysis of evidence (specialized units, expert investigator);(v) International co-operation (mutual legal assistance, joint investigation, 24/7 contact point
network, extradition).
(b) Issues and measures concerning cybercrime prosecution (factors deciding whether, where andwhom to prosecute, framing appropriate charges, jurisdictional issues).
(c) Issues and measures concerning cybercrime trial, adjudication and sentencing:(i) Evidential issues (admissibility of the evidence, managing large volumes or encrypted evidence, expert witness);(ii) Proving criminal intent;(iii) Methods and factors to decide appropriate sanction.
(NB: for the purpose of preparing their individual presentation papers, participants are requested
to explain their existing legal regimes and mechanisms to investigate, prosecute and adjudicate
cybercrime in their respective countries).

36

ADMINISTRATIVE NEWS

Faculty Changes
Ms. Kayo Ishihara, formerly Professor of UNAFEI, was transferred and appointed to the
Ministry of Justice on 1 April 2008.
Mr. Junichiro Otani, a public prosecutor, joined UNAFEI as a Professor on 1 April 2008.
Overseas Trips by Staff
Director Keiichi Aizawa and Mr. Junichiro Otani (Professor) visited Vienna, Austria from13 to 20 April to attend the 17th Session of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice. The Director made a statement to the Commission.
Ms. Tae Sugiyama (Professor) visited Canada from 29 April to 4 May to attend an
International Meeting of Experts at the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform andCriminal Justice Policy. The topic of the meeting was "International Study of Suspension, Recall
and Revocation Legislation, Policies, Practices and Processes".
Deputy Director Takeshi Seto and Mr. Jun Oshino (Professor) visited China from 7 to 17
May to meet with personnel from various criminal justice organizations and to prepare for the2009 Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s Republic of China.
Director Keiichi Aizawa visited the Republic of the Philippines from 28 to 31 May to prepare for the Third Regional Seminar for Southeast Asian Countries, to be held in 2009.
Mr. Shintaro Naito (Professor) visited Busan and Seoul, Korea from 8 to 13 June to attend
the High Level Prosecutors Meeting of the 5th International Association of Prosecutors Asia-PacificRegional Conference.

37

FACULTY AND STAFF OF UNAFEI

Faculty:
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa
Mr. Takeshi Seto
Mr. Motoo Noguchi
Mr. Haruhiko Higuchi
Ms. Tae Sugiyama
Mr. Tetsuya Sugano
Mr. Jun Oshino
Mr. Ryuji Tatsuya
Mr. Koji Yamada
Mr. Shintaro Naito
Mr. Junichiro Otani
Ms. Grace Lord

Secretariat:
Mr. Sakumi Fujii
Mr. Hitoshi Nakasuga
Mr. Masato Fujiwara

Director
Deputy Director
Professor
Professor
Professor, Chief of Information and LibraryService Division
Professor, Chief of Research Division, 139th
Course Programming Officer
Professor, Chief of Training Division
Professor
Professor
Professor
Professor
Linguistic Adviser

Chief of Secretariat
Co-Deputy Chief of Secretariat
Co-Deputy Chief of Secretariat

General and Financial Affairs Section:
Mr. Masaaki Kojitani
Chief
Mr. Fumihiro Nakayasu
Mr. Atsushi Takagi
Ms. Kayoko Ono

Training and Hostel Management Affairs Section:
Mr. Etsuya Iwakami
Chief
Mr. Yuichi Kitada
Mr. Ikuo Kosaka
Mr. Yuichi Shirakawa
139th Assistant Course Programming Officer
Ms. Akane Uenishi

International Research Affairs Section:
Mr. Kenichiro Koiwa
Chief
Ms. Masumi Tomita
Librarian

Secretarial Staff:
Ms. Miki Usuki
Ms. Aiko Ota

38

Kitchen:Mr. Yuji Matsumoto

Chef

JICA Co-ordinator for the 139th International Training Course:
Ms. Kazue Obayashi
JICA

UNAFEI Home Page: http://www.unafei.or.jp/
UNAFEI E-mail: unafei@moj.go.jp