ISSN 1020-914X

UNAFEI

NEWSLETTER
UNAFEI

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

No. 158
March 2019

Established1961
IN THIS ISSUE

Page

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR

1

THE 171ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR

3

CRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CRIME MOTIVATED BY INTOLERANCE ANDDISCRIMINATION
Seminar Rationale
Seminar Summary
Lecture Topics
Individual Presentation Topics
Group Workshop Sessions
Observation Visits
Group Study Tours
Special Events
Reference Materials
Expert and Participant List
The 21st UNAFEI UNCAC Training Programme

3
9
10
12
14
17
18
19
20
21
24

INFORMATION ABOUT FORTHCOMING PROGRAMMESThe Comparative Study of Myanmar and Japan to Improve Prison Management
The Comparative Study of the Criminal Justice Systems of Japan and Nepal
The 172nd International Training Course
The Follow-up Seminar of the Third Country Training Programme for the Development of Effective
Community-Based Treatment of Offenders in the CLMV Countries
The 173rd International Training Course

28
28
28
28

FACULTY AND STAFF OF UNAFEI

29

UNAFEI IS AN AFFILIATED REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

2-1-18, MOKUSEINOMORI, AKISHIMA-SHI, TOKYO, 196-8570, JAPANTEL: 81-42-500-5100 ◆ FAX: 81-42-500-5195 ◆ E-MAIL: unafei@i.moj.go.jp
HOME PAGE: https://www.unafei.or.jp/

28
28

1
LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR
It is my privilege to inform readers of the successful completion of the 171stInternational Senior Seminar on the “Criminal Justice Response to Crime Motivated by
Intolerance and Discrimination”, which took place from 9 January to 7 February 2019. In thisSeminar, we welcomed 6 Japanese participants and 13 overseas participants: 11 from Asia, 1from Oceania, and 1 from South America. The participants included judges, prosecutors,
probation officers, police officers and other public officials involved in the field of crime
prevention and criminal justice. As this newsletter demonstrates, the Seminar was extremely
productive. It consisted of lectures by visiting experts, ad hoc lecturers, UNAFEI faculty
members, individual presentations, visits to relevant criminal justice agencies, and groupworkshop and plenary sessions.
In order to suppress intolerance crimes effectively, it is necessary to establish proper
legal bases to punish intolerance crimes, such as by adopting penalty enhancement or othersubstantive offences. During investigation, criminal justice authorities must seek and identify
bias indicators, that is, adequate evidence to prove the offender’s intolerant or discriminatory
motives. Moreover, it is essential to take steps to build public confidence in law enforcement
in order to facilitate cooperation with investigations. This can be done by establishing positive
professional relationships with victims and victim communities and by implementing witness
protection and other measures that provide broader assistance (e.g. access to victim support
services). When crimes are motivated by intolerance or discrimination, imposing a penalty
alone may not be sufficient to prevent the offender from committing further crimes. Thus, it isimportant to administer proper interventions, including those aimed at correcting theoffender’s biased or discriminatory thoughts, and utilization of the restorative justiceapproach.
UNAFEI, as one of the institutes of the United Nations Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice Programme Network, held this Seminar to offer participants an opportunity to clarify
and analyse the current situation of efforts to combat crimes motivated by intolerance anddiscrimination in each participating jurisdiction. Additionally, the participants were able toshare experiences, gain knowledge, and build a human network of counterparts.
During the Seminar, the participants diligently and comprehensively examined the main
theme, 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. With the academic and practical input from the visiting experts,
ad hoc lecturers and UNAFEI faculty—and the in-depth discussions they had with eachother—the participants are now better equipped to enhance the policies and practices related
to criminal justice in their respective jurisdictions.
I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to all of the participants upon theirsuccessful completion of the Seminar, made possible by their strenuous efforts. My heartfelt
gratitude goes out to the visiting experts and ad hoc lecturers who contributed a great deal to
the Seminar’s success. Furthermore, I appreciate the indispensable assistance and cooperation
extended to UNAFEI by various agencies and institutions that helped diversify the Seminar.
I would also like to express my great appreciation to the Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA) for its immeasurable support throughout the Seminar. At the2same time, a warm tribute must be paid to the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF) andits branch organizations for their substantial contributions to our activities. Lastly, I owe mygratitude to all the individuals whose unselfish efforts behind the scenes contributed
significantly to the successful realization of this Seminar.
Upon returning home, I genuinely believe that, like their predecessors, the strong
determination and dedication of the participants will enable them to work towards the
improvement of their respective jurisdictions’ criminal justice systems, and towards thebenefit of international society as a whole.
Finally, I would like to reiterate my best regards to the participants of the 171stInternational Senior Seminar. I hope that the experience they gained during the Seminarproves 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.
March 2019

Takeshi SETO
Director, UNAFEI

3
THE 171ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINARCRIMINAL JUSTICE RESPONSE TO CRIME MOTIVATED BY INTOLERANCE ANDDISCRIMINATION

Seminar Rationale
The equality norm is a fundamental value that seeks to achieve human dignity and torealize the potential of all people. The United Nations instruments have consistently
recognized the importance of the equality norm. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights,
adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 1948, provides that everyone is entitledto all the rights and freedoms without distinction of any kind1. In 2015, the United Nations
General Assembly adopted the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development (SDGs)2, whichemphasize the responsibilities of all States to respect, protect and promote human rights andfundamental freedoms for all without distinction of any kind as to race, colour, sex, language,
religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth, disability or otherstatus (paragraph 19). Moreover, the SDG targets specifically refer to, among others:• ending all forms of discrimination against all women and girls everywhere (target
5.1);• eliminating all forms of violence against all women and girls in the public and private
spheres, including trafficking and sexual and other types of exploitation (target 5.2);• by 2030, empowering and promoting the social, economic and political inclusion of
all irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic orother status (target 10.2); and• promoting and enforcing non-discriminatory laws and politics for sustainable
development (target 16.b).
However, crimes motivated by intolerance and discrimination of all kinds (hereinafterreferred to as “intolerance crimes”) are global phenomena, and cases of intolerance crimes
have been reported by many states. Typically, intolerance crimes are violent crimes involving
assault, intimidation, property destruction or vandalism motivated by race, ethnicity, religiousor sexual-orientation bias. Further, in some cases, intolerant or discriminatory bias has led tomore serious offences, such as violence against women (based on gender bias), murder oreven terrorism.
Intolerance crimes often cause greater negative impacts on the individual victims aswell as on the society at large, as compared to ordinary crimes. First, the individual victim
tends to endure more serious mental damage from intolerance crimes, since in such crimes,
the criminal commits an offence against the victim merely on the basis of a person’s specific“The Universal Declaration of Human Rights”, General Assembly resolution 3/217 of 10 December 1948, article 2.
“Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development”, General Assembly resolution 70/1 of 25
September 2015.

1
2

4
characteristic, which quite frequently is of an inherent nature or represents the person’s
fundamental values, such as race, gender or religion. Second, intolerance crimes, once
committed, may cause fear and anxiety in the victimized community. These negative effects
can be even more serious where a group with such characteristics has historically been
victimized by discrimination. Furthermore, by creating or emphasizing existing social
tensions, intolerance crimes have the potential to cause social division and civil unrest, or may
result in negative spirals of violence and retaliation, thus raising security and public orderissues3.
Given these negative impacts, it is important for the international community to makeefforts to prevent and suppress intolerance crimes. In this regard, the Doha Declaration,
adopted by the Thirteenth UN Congress on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice in 2015,
explicitly addresses this issue. Paragraph 5 of the Doha Declaration4 states that:
we reaffirm our commitment and strong political will in support of effective, fair,humane, and accountable criminal justice systems and the institutions comprisingthem, and encourage the effective participation and inclusion of all sectors ofsociety, thus creating the conditions needed to advance the wider United Nations
agenda, while respecting fully the principles of sovereignty and territorial
integrity of States and recognizing the responsibility of Member States to upholdhuman dignity, all human rights and fundamental freedoms for all, in particular
for those affected by crime and those who may be in contact with the criminal
justice system, including vulnerable members of society, regardless of theirstatus, who may be subject to multiple and aggravated forms of discrimination,and to prevent and counter crime motivated by intolerance or discrimination of
any kind.
And to that end, it enumerates the following measures that Member States should
endeavour to take, such as:• to conduct further research and gather data on crime victimization motivated bydiscrimination of any kind and to exchange experiences in and information on
effective laws and policies that can prevent such crimes, bring perpetrators to justiceand provide support to victims (paragraph 5(p));• to consider providing specialized training to criminal justice professionals to enhancecapacities for recognizing, understanding, suppressing and investigating hate crimes
motivated by discrimination of any kind, to help engage effectively with victim
communities and to build public confidence and cooperation with criminal justiceagencies (paragraph 5(q)); and• to intensify national and international efforts to eliminate all forms of discrimination,
including racism, religious intolerance, xenophobia and gender-related discrimination
by, inter alia, raising awareness, developing educational materials and programmes,and considering, where appropriate, drafting and enforcing legislation against
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) (2009) Hate Crime Laws: A Practical Guide, Warsaw:
OSCE/ODIHR:19-21.
4“The Doha Declaration on integrating crime prevention and criminal justice into the wider United Nations agenda toaddress social and economic challenges and to promote the rule of law at the national and international levels, and public
participation”, Economic and Social Council resolution 2015/19, annex.
3

5
discrimination (paragraph 5(r)).
Criminal justice responses to intolerance crimes vary from country to country. When it
comes to criminalization of intolerance crimes, there may be several types of approaches. One
approach is the substantive offence approach, where the law criminalizes a separate offence of
intolerance crime that includes the bias motive as an integral element of the offence. Anotherapproach is penalty enhancement, where the law does not recognize the bias motive as theconstituent element of the offence but as an aggravating factor which increases the penalty fora “base offence” such as murder, sexual violence, assault, on the ground that the crime iscommitted with such motive. The penalty enhancement approach also includes cases where
the law does not explicitly refer to bias motive as an aggravating sentencing factor, but by theuse of general sentencing principles, including the proportionality principle, a more severe
penalty may be imposed on intolerance crimes.
In jurisdictions where the law specifically refers to intolerance crimes, whether from thesubstantive offence approach or the penalty enhancement approach, other legal issues mayvary from country to country. Such legal issues include: whether an offence is committed
against persons, property or both, all constitute substantive offences or aggravating factors;
which characteristics should be protected (e. g. race, nationality, religion, gender, politicalaffiliation, ideology, disability); and which standard of proof should be required for the bias
elements5.
Further, in jurisdictions where neither a substantive offence approach nor a penalty
enhancement approach is taken, other measures may be taken to ensure a proportionate
penalty is imposed, for example, by relying on the sentencing discretion of the judge.
Regarding investigation, prosecution and adjudication, there are some challenges
particularly relevant to intolerance crimes. First, as motivation is a subjective element, it isdifficult to collect evidence and prove the bias elements if the offender denies having
committed the crime with a bias motive or admits to having had a bias motive but states that
there were other decisive ones. Second, it is inevitable for investigation, prosecution andadjudication of intolerance crimes to cooperate with the victim as well as with the community
to which the victim belongs since many of these crimes occur within small communities andinvolved neighbours. However, these victims and witnesses tend to be reluctant to report toand cooperate with law enforcement authorities and prosecutors or testify before the court fora variety of reasons. Some fear retaliation because, if the offence occurred within acommunity or involved neighbours, the offender usually knows where the victim lives orworks. Some have a history of negative experiences involving law enforcement. In somecases, law enforcement has failed to pursue intolerance crimes or has engaged indiscrimination or hostility toward the victim based on the victim’s inherent nature or
characteristics. This naturally results in distrust of law enforcement, and leads to a lack ofcooperation between law enforcement and victims or victim groups. Others fear identificationsuch as having their sexual orientation revealed to family and friends or their status as anillegal migrant coming to the attention of authorities6.

Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) (2009) Hate Crime Laws: A Practical Guide, Warsaw:
OSCE/ODIHR: 31-48.
6
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) (2014) Prosecuting Hate Crimes: A Practical Guide,
Warsaw: OSCE/ODIHR: 51-55.
5

6
Therefore, in order to suppress intolerance crimes effectively, it is necessary forcriminal justice authorities to seek adequate evidence that would enable them to prove theoffender’s intolerant or discriminatory motives. Moreover, it is essential for them to take steps
to build public confidence with the victims and victim communities so as to facilitate theircooperation. It is also crucial to take practical measures to encourage the victims and victim
communities to report to and cooperate with criminal justice authorities, which include
witness protection measures and other measures to provide them with proper assistance in a
broader sense (e.g. access to victim support services).
Moreover, since intolerance crimes are motivated by discrimination or intolerance,
imposing a penalty alone may not be sufficient to prevent the offender from committing future
crimes. It is also necessary to deliver proper interventions, including those aimed at correcting
the offender’s biased or discriminatory thoughts.
In this regard, this programme offered participants an opportunity to deepen theirunderstanding and share experiences and knowledge about the situations of, and criminal
justice responses to, intolerance crimes in each participating country. The information sharedincluded legislation, policies and practices that respond to intolerance crimes, enabling theparticipants to explore effective practical countermeasures by criminal justice authorities,
particularly in regard to their investigation, prosecution and adjudication, that would fit within
the legal system and the cultural and social background of each country.
Main Theme of the Seminar
The main theme of the Seminar was the “Criminal Justice Response to Crime Motivatedby Intolerance and Discrimination”. This Seminar was designed to guide each participating
country on the development and improvement of its criminal justice response to intolerance
crimes. The expected outcome was the identification of key elements of best policies andpractices to respond to intolerance crimes in the field of crime prevention and criminal justicewhich can be commonly shared among the participating countries regardless of the differencesin their legal systems, culture and society.
Through a variety of lectures, presentations, discussions, observation tours as well as
intensive group workshops, participants learned the theories, principles and practicalexperiences of other countries. The programme also explored the advantages and/or
shortcomings of the participating countries’ systems and practices concerning criminal justiceand the treatment of criminal offenders in light of the UN standards and norms, embodying
key values and concepts.
With its comparative approach, the programme enabled participants to acquire new anddifferent viewpoints, and inspired them to revisit and consider possible ways to improve theirown systems and practices.
While the experiences of countries which have been successful in countering
intolerance crimes can serve as good examples to be studied by other countries, the challenges
that countries face in suppressing intolerance crimes can also inspire other countries towards
overcoming similar challenges and problems.
Such experience of gaining a multifaceted view and an understanding by eachparticipant of his or her own system and practices will eventually contribute to renewed or
improved policies concerning the administration of criminal justice and its implementation to7
counter intolerance crimes in his or her own country. Further, it will lead to enhanced crime
prevention and rehabilitation of criminal offenders and their reintegration into society, which
ultimately contributes to the building of peaceful and inclusive societies based on core values
such as human rights and the rule of law.
In addition, the Seminar promoted the formation of a personal and professional network
among the participants, which will benefit each one of them and their respective countries in
the future by the sharing of updated information, thus enhancing international cooperation in
the field of crime prevention and criminal justice.
Key Topics of the Seminar
The following key topics were addressed during the Seminar:
1) Current situation of intolerance crimes- Types of intolerance crimes that are prevalent in the participating countries; typesof “base offences” (e. g. murder, sexual violation, assault, etc.), and types ofmotivation or bias elements (e. g. racism, religious intolerance, xenophobia,
gender-related discrimination)-

Statistical information on the current situation of intolerance crimes and othereffective methods taken to obtain precise information (e.g. surveys)

2) Legislation and legislative approaches against intolerance crimes- Criminalization of intolerance crimes and the construction of the offences(whether intolerant or discriminatory motive is a constituent element of theoffence)-

Approaches taken to consider the intolerant or discriminatory motives (e. g.
separate offence approach, penalty enhancement approach) and types of protectedcharacteristics of the victims that are considered (e.g. race, nationality, religion,
gender, political affiliation, ideology, disability)-

Standard of proof for intolerant/discriminatory motives and other legal issues3) Effective measures to investigate, prosecute and adjudicate intolerance crimes- Type of evidence that is useful to prove intolerant/discriminatory motives (e.g.
evidence indicating connections to an organized hate group, and communications
with others by e-mails, social media, etc. indicating biased thoughts) andeffective measures to collect them-

Measures to encourage victims and witnesses in the community to report to andcooperate with criminal justice authorities• witness protection measures• measures to ensure adequate assistance for victims and victim communities• measures to ease the victim’s or the victim community’s security concerns• measures to protect the victim from identification• measures to build public confidence and cooperative relationships with
community groups that are vulnerable to intolerance crimes-

Measures to ensure a proportionate penalty

84) Effective treatment of offenders of intolerance crimes including delivering properinterventions
Each participant was required to submit an Individual Presentation Paper regarding theabove-mentioned topics as they apply to his or her country, and to explain and discuss these
topics in his or her individual presentation.

9
Seminar Summary
Lectures
During the Seminar, the participants attended 31 lectures, including 9 presented by thevisiting experts, 4 by ad hoc lecturers, and 5 by the faculty of UNAFEI, as well as a meetingwith Japanese Volunteer Probation Officers. Four distinguished criminal justice practitioners
served as UNAFEI’s visiting experts. They lectured on issues relating to the main theme of
the Seminar and contributed significantly beyond their lectures by encouraging discussions
after their lectures, participating in the discussions of other programmes, and conversing withthe participants on informal occasions. Additionally, the ad hoc lectures were delivered by
officers of the Correction Bureau, the Yokohama District Public Prosecutors’ Office, the
Human Rights Bureau and the National Police Agency. The lecturers and lecture topics arelisted on pages 10 to 11.
Individual Presentations
During the second week of the course, all participants delivered individual presentations
which introduced the situation, problems and future prospects of the participants’ countries.
These papers were compiled onto a USB memory stick and distributed to all the participants.
The titles of these individual presentation papers are listed on pages 12 to 13.
Group Workshop Sessions
Group workshop sessions provided the participants with the opportunity to further
examine 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 responses to a previously distributed questionnaire. Selected participants served aschairpersons, co-chairpersons, rapporteurs or co-rapporteurs, and faculty members served asadvisers. 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,
the individual presentations, lectures and so forth. After the group workshop sessions, eachgroup prepared a presentation based on the group discussions. These were subsequently
presented in the plenary report-back session, along with individual action plans of eachparticipant for implementation upon returning home. Brief summaries of the group workshop
reports are provided on pages 14 to 16.
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 Seminar’s
academic agenda, many activities were arranged to provide a greater understanding ofJapanese 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 17 to 19.

10Lecture Topics
Visiting Experts' Lectures
1)

Ms. Cristina M. Finch• Introduction to Hate Crime• Recognizing and Investigating Hate Crime• Prosecuting Hate Crime

2)

Mr. Mark Walters• Understanding the Harms of Hate Crime• Hate Crime and Restorative Justice3)

Ms. Santanee Ditsayabut• Crimes Motivated by Gender Discrimination in Thailand

4)

Mr. Dimosthenis Chrysikos• International Efforts to Follow-up on the Doha Declaration of the 13th Congress• Crimes Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination of all Kind: Overview of Trends
and Response at National and International Levels

UNAFEI Professors’ Lectures
1)

Mr. FUTAGOISHI Ryo, Professor, UNAFEI• Criminal Justice System in Japan: Investigation & Prosecution

2)

Mr. HIRANO Nozomu, Professor, UNAFEI• Criminal Justice System in Japan—Criminal Trials• Criminal Justice System in Japan—Fair Sentencing Practices3)

Ms. KITAGAWA Mika, Professor, UNAFEI• Community Corrections in Japan4)

Ms. YAMAMOTO Mana, Professor, UNAFEI• Management of Violent Extremists

11
5)

Mr. FURUHASHI Takuya, Professor, UNAFEI• Corrections in Japan6)

Mr. YOKOTA Naoyuki, Assistant Commissioner, Adjunct Professor, UNAFEI• Criminal Justice System in Japan: Police

Ad Hoc Lectures
1)

Mr. MAEDA Syota
Officer, Correction Bureau in the Ministry of Justice• The Current Situation of Treatment of Convicts

2)

Mr. KIKEGAWA Kenichi
Deputy-Director of the Trial Department, Yokohama District Public Prosecutors Office• A Case of Crime Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination in Japan

3)

Mr. NAKAJIMA Yukio
Human Rights Bureau, Ministry of Justice• Measures to Address and Prevent Discrimination

4)

Mr. FUJISHIMA Takeshi
Deputy Director in charge of information on right-wing groups, Public Security
Division, National Police Agency• Trends of Right-Wing Civic Groups and Countermeasures

12
Individual Presentation Topics
Overseas Participants
1)

Mr. Andre Lopes LASMAR (Brazil)• Criminal Justice Response to Crime Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination —The Brazilian Legislation and Experience2)

Mr. Ahmed SHUHAD (Maldives)• Maldives Justice System and the Legal Framework on Discrimination and GenderBased Violence3)

Ms. Raufa HAIDAR (Maldives)• Violence against Women in Maldives

4)

Mr. Win Myint Zaw (Myanmar)• Criminal Justice Response to Crime Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination

5)

Mr. Shahid JAVED (Pakistan)• Presentation on Criminal Justice Response to Crimes Motivated by Intolerance andDiscrimination

6)

Mr. Tufail AHMED (Pakistan)• Violence against Women in Pakistan

7)

Mr. Jimmy Puieki ONOPIA (Papua New Guinea)• Crimes of Intolerance and Discrimination—PNG Perspective

8)

Mr. Salvador Jr Mamauag TRONO (Philippines)• Crimes Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination in the Philippines

9)

Mr. Ranga Srinath Abeywickrema DISSANAYAKE (Sri Lanka)• Sri Lankan Response to Combating Crimes Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination

10)

Mr. Waruna Sanjeewa Ekanayake JAYASUNDARA (Sri Lanka)• Criminal Justice Response to Crime Motivated by Intolerance and Discrimination

13
11)

Mr. Kodir Voithanovich ASKAROV (Uzbekistan)• Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice in Namangan/Chust Region of Uzbekistan

12)

Mr. Istam Rustamovich ASTANOV (Uzbekistan)• Discrimination: Theoretical and Practical Aspects

13)

Mr. Hai Ngoc NGUYEN (Viet Nam)
• The Current Situation of Intolerance Crimes in Vietnam and the Criminal Justice
Response

Japanese Participants
14)

Ms. Rana FUJITA (Japan)• Domestic Violence Restraining Orders in Japan — Anne and Ben’s Case15)

Ms. Shizu ICHIHARA (Japan)• Victim Protection in Intolerance Crime Cases

16)

Mr. Takuro HIMEDA (Japan)• Treatment of Offenders in Japanese Prison

17)

Mr. Kotaro KADOWAKI (Japan)• Applying the Violence Prevention Programme to the Offenders Who Have Committed
Violent Hate Crimes

18)

Mr. Teruhide NUMAMAE (Japan)• Victim Protection in Japan: Measures to Support Victim Testimony at Trial

19)

Mr. Koji TAMADA (Japan)• Case Study: A Hate Crime in Nagoya

14Group Workshop Sessions
Group 1
THE CHALLENGES AND BEST PRACTICES TO ENCOUNTER CRIMESMOTIVATED BY INTOLERANCE AND DISCRIMINATION
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members
Advisers

Mr. Ahmed Shuhad
Mr. Jimmy Puieki Onopia
Ms. Rana Fujita
Mr. Win Myint Zaw
Mr. Tufail Ahmend
Mr. Teruhide Numamae
Prof. Takuya Furuhashi
Prof. Junichiro Otani
Prof. Masahiro Yamada(Maldives)(Papua New Guinea)(Japan)(Myanmar)(Pakistan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Report SummaryGroup 1 explored challenges faced by the participating countries in combating crimes
motivated by intolerance and discrimination (hereinafter, “intolerance crimes”), as well as
best practices to respond to such crimes. Recognizing that gender-based violence is a common
problem in all countries, the group reported that some countries face unique intolerance
crimes (such as those related to ethnicity, political ideology, sorcery and tribal conflict). The
group offered recommendations to enhance the response to intolerance crimes, stressing theimportance of establishing legal frameworks to overcome them.
There are a number of underlying problems which limit the ability of criminal justiceauthorities to respond to intolerance crimes. These problems include: the lack of specific legal
frameworks, making it difficult to prosecute and impose appropriate sentences; lack ofrecognition by some within criminal justice systems that violence against women (VAW) anddomestic violence (DV) are crimes; the prevalence of revictimization; social stigma against
victims of abuse; lack of gender sensitivity; and lack of skilled human and financial resources.
To respond to these problems, specific recommendations were offered in reference tothe following categories: (1) legal framework and political will; (2) human resources and staff
training; (3) monitoring and reporting of intolerance crimes; (4) inclusion of victims’
perspectives in policymaking; and (5) public awareness and access to victim support services.
Further, it was noted that social barriers—such as socio-cultural beliefs, attitudes toward
domestic violence, lack of awareness of legal rights and options, and fear of retaliation—weaken efforts to counter intolerance crimes.
Group 1 stressed the importance of establishing legal frameworks to overcome
intolerance crimes. Each of the countries participating in the group relied on international
conventions, constitutional provisions, penal codes, and domestic violence legislation. Several
countries have established national action plans to respond to intolerance crimes, while others
have adopted specific legislation focused on vulnerable groups in need of protection.

15
Group 2CRIMES MOTIVATED BY INTOLERANCE AND DISCRIMINATION: PROBLEMSAND THEIR RESOLUTION
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members
AdviserMr. Andre Lopes Lasmar
Mr. Shahid Javed
Mr. Waruna Sanjeewa Ekanayake
Jayasundara
Ms. Shizu Ichihara
Mr. Istam Rustamovich Astanov
Mr. Takuro Himeda
Prof. Ryo Futagoishi(Brazil)(Pakistan)(Sri Lanka)(Japan)(Uzbekistan)(Japan)(UNAFEI)

Report Summary
The members of Group 2 conducted a comprehensive review of the victim and witness
protection measures and legislative approaches to addressing intolerance crimes in theparticipating countries. Noting that intolerance crime is a global problem, each country
reported challenges, particularly in terms of public awareness of victim and witness protection
measures, lack of public confidence in the effectiveness of such measures, and lack of public
and professional understanding of laws enacted to counter intolerance crimes.
The group’s analysis focuses on intolerance crimes and responses in all five
participating countries. While the specific forms of intolerance crime and the target groups ofthese crimes vary from country to country, the group agreed that intolerance crimes are a
global problem. Target groups include religious minorities, immigrants, racial minorities, theLGBT community, indigenous communities, among many others.
The group’s review of key measures taken to counter intolerance crimes focused on
legislative measures to enhance victim and witness protection and legislative measures tocriminalize or enhance punishment of intolerance crimes. Regarding victim and witness
protection, the challenges identified include: (1) the lack of victim and witness protection
programmes in some countries, (2) lack of public awareness of victim and witness protection
measures, (3) lack of faith in the effectiveness of such measures, resulting in less cooperationfrom the public in law enforcement investigations, and (3) insufficient human and financial
resources.
From the perspective of legislative measures to criminalize or punish intolerance
crimes, some countries have elected to create new substantive offences to criminalize
intolerance crimes, while other have opted for penalty enhancement. Challenges identified
include (1) lack of understanding of the new laws and reluctance to prosecute, (2) lack ofsentencing parameters for judges, and (3) restrictive definitions of protected groups.

16Group 3
BEST PRACTICES FOR SUPPORTING VICTIMS OF CRIME MOTIVATED BY
INTOLERANCE AND DISCRIMINATION
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members
AdviserMr. Ranga Srinath Abeywickrema
Dissanayake
Mr. Kotaro Kadowaki
Mr. Hai Ngoc Nguyen
Ms. Raufa Haidar
Mr. Koji Tamada
Mr. Salvador Mamauag Trono Jr.
Mr. Kodir Voithanovich Askarov
Prof. Mika Kitagawa
Prof. Nozomu Hirano
Prof. Hidenori Ohinata(Sri Lanka)(Japan)(Viet Nam)
(Maldives)(Japan)(Philippines)(Uzbekistan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

Report SummaryGroup 3 reviewed the current situation of intolerance crime in the participating
countries and identified best practices to support victims. Intolerance crimes target persons
and groups based on ethnicity, race, disability, religious beliefs, etc. and include gender-based
violence. To counter these crimes, the group stressed the need to protect victims and witnesses
throughout all stages of the criminal justice process.
In response to intolerance crimes, a number of approaches used in various jurisdictions
were reported: legislative measures to protect victims and witnesses, special laws for genderbased violence, the creation of special victim and witness protection agencies and specificpolice units for gender-based violence, and measures to protect victims and witnesses
throughout the judicial process, including when giving testimony. While victim and witness
protection measures do encourage cooperation with law enforcement authorities, the group
found that cooperation can be limited due to lack of confidence in the criminal justice system,
fear of revictimization, the attitude of the victims (including economic dependency,
community norms, etc.), and insufficient levels of victim support.
To ensure sufficient support for victims and witnesses, their unique needs during the
pre-trial, trial and post-trial stages must be addressed. Throughout all stages, theconfidentiality of victims’ identities should be maintained in order to prevent revictimization.
During the pre-trial stage, measures to facilitate reporting of crime include providing
interpreters, psychological and legal support, providing hotlines for reporting crimes andutilization of specialized units for handling intolerance crimes. To facilitate police
investigations, the group recommended establishing safehouses and interview rooms suitableto victims, judicial and police protection, and the provision of financial support to victims.
During the trial stage, the group recommended a number of measures including the use ofvideo-link and witness screening equipment, providing personal and legal support, etc. During
the post-trial stage, the group stressed the importance of ensuring adequate victim
compensation. Further, the group recommended providing psychological support, safehouses,
and keeping the victim appropriately informed of the status of the offender’s conviction andsentence.

17
Observation Visits
Date

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

11 Jan.

Training Institute for Correctional
Personnel• Dr. Manabu Nakajima

16 Jan.

Japan Legal Support Centre• Mr. Syunsuke Marushima• Ms. Satoko Tomita

24 Jan.

Supreme Court
Tokyo District Court• Mr. MIURA Mamoru(Supreme Court Judge)

18Group Study Tours
Date

Location

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

30 Jan.

Hiroshima

Halfway House
WITH HIROSHIMA• Mr. KAYA Susumu

31 Jan.

Kyoto

Kyoto District Public
Prosecutors Office• Ms. SUZUKI Mariko(Deputy Chief Prosecutor)

1 Feb.

Kyoto

Kyoto Prefectural Police
Headquarters• Mr. UTSUMI Hideaki

19Special Events
12 Jan.
16, 17, 23 Jan.

Welcome Party
Japanese Conversation Classes

The overseas participants attended three Japanese conversation classes and learned
practical Japanese expressions. The sensei (teachers) were Ms. NAGAI Yae and Ms.
KIMURA Keiko from EP academy.
18 Jan.

Courtesy Call to the Minister of Justice
andReception by the Vice-Minister of Justice

At the conclusion of their courtesy visit to the Minister of Justice, Mr. KANEDA
Katsutoshi, a reception was held for the participants by the Vice-Minister of Justice, Mr.
KUROKAWA Hiromu, at the Danwa-shitsu Lounge on the 20th floor of the ministrybuilding, overlooking Hibiya Park.
20 Jan.

UNAFEI International Table Tennis Tournament

The UNAFEI Table Tennis Tournament was held in the auditorium. Mixed teams ofinternational participants, Japanese participants, and UNAFEI faculty and staff were formed,
and competed against each other.
24 Jan.

Social with Volunteer Probation Officers

The participants had an opportunity to exchange views with Japanese Volunteer
Probation Officers at a social at UNAFEI.
28 Jan.

Home Visits

The Volunteer Probation Officers Association in Support of UNAFEI’s Activities
kindly organized a home visit programme. The hosts were Mr. ISHIZAKI Toshikazu, Mr.
SHIMADA Koichiro, Mr. TANAKA Kimio, Ms. SHIBATA Kazuko and Mr. YATO Ichiro.
They kindly invited the participants to their homes.
9 Feb.

Farewell Party

A party was held to bid farewell to the participants.

20
Reference Materials
UNAFEI’s 171ST INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR
LIST OF REFERENCE MATERIALS

1Transforming our world: the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development

2

The Doha Declaration on integrating crime prevention and criminal justice into thewider United Nations agenda to address social and economic challenges and topromote the rule of law at the national and international levels, and public
participation

3

Penal Code (Data Only)

4

Code of Criminal Procedure (Data Only)

5

Prosecuting Hate Crimes (ODIHR)

6

Criminal Justice in Japan (Data Only)(Data Only)

21
Expert and Participant List
Visiting Experts
Ms. Cristina M. Finch

Head
Tolerance and Non-Discrimination Department
Office for Democratic Institutions and Human
Rights (ODIHR)
Organization for Security and Cooperation in
Europe (OSCE)

Mr. Mark Walters

Professor of Criminal Law and Criminology
School of Law, Politics and Sociology
University of Sussex
United Kingdom

Ms. Santanee Ditsayabut

Provincial Public Prosecutor
Assistant Secretary to the Deputy Attorney
General
Office of Attorney General
Thailand

Mr. Dimosthenis Chrysikos

Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Officer
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime(UNODC)
Division for Treaty Affairs

Overseas Participants
Mr. Andre Lopes LASMAR

Federal Prosecutor
Office of Federal Prosecution in Sao PauloFederal Prosecution Service
BrazilMr. Ahmed SHUHADHead of Northern Operations Command
Divisional Operations Command
Maldives Police Service

Ms. Raufa HAIDAR

Assistant Legal Officer
Protocol Division
Supreme Court
Maldives

Mr. Win Myint Zaw

Deputy Director
Division against Transnational Crime
Myanmar Police Forces

22
Mr. Shahid JAVED

Deputy Inspector General of Police
Punjab Police
Pakistan

Mr. Tufail AHMED

Senior Superintendent of Police
Central Police Headquarters
Gilgit Baltistan Police
Pakistan

Mr. Jimmy Puieki ONOPIA

Director Prosecutions
Crimes Division
Police Department
Papua New Guinea

Mr. Salvador Jr Mamauag TRONO

Senior Tactical Officer
Philippine National Police Academy

Mr. Ranga Srinath Abeywickrema
DISSANAYAKE

Judicial Officer
Magistrate Court-Fort
Judicial Service Commission
Sri Lanka

Mr. Waruna Sanjeewa Ekanayake
JAYASUNDARA

Director In ChargeCounter Terrorism and Investigation Division
Sri Lanka Police

Mr. Kodir Voithanovich ASKAROV

Deputy Prosecutor
Chust District Prosecutor’s Office
Uzbekistan

Mr. Istam Rustamovich ASTANOVAssistant Professor of Academy
Department of Supervision over the Struggle
against Crime
Academy General Prosecutor’s Office
Uzbekistan

Mr. Hai Ngoc NGUYEN

Deputy Director
Research Centre for Criminology and Criminal
Investigation
The People’s Police Academy
Ministry of Public Security
Viet NamJapanese Participants
Ms. Rana FUJITA

Judge
Ryugasaki Branch
Mito District Court

23
Ms. Shizu ICHIHARA

Judge
Kobe District Court

Mr. Takuro HIMEDA

Chief of General Affairs Section
Maebashi Prison

Mr. Kotaro KADOWAKI

Deputy Director
Sendai Probation Office

Mr. Teruhide NUMAMAE

Public Prosecutor
Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office

Mr. Koji TAMADA

Public Prosecutor
Nagoya District Public Prosecutors Office

24
The 21st UNAFEI UNCAC Training Programme
The 21st UNAFEI UNCAC Training Programme was held from 11 October to 16
November 2018. Thirty-five participants attended: 27 overseas participants and 7 Japaneseparticipants. The main theme of the programme was the Criminal Justice Response to
Corruption.
Overseas Participants
Mr. Daniel Silvestre de LIMA

Federal Police Chief
Police Station to Combat Corruption/Diversionof Public Resources Police Superintendence in
Pernambuco
Brazil Federal Police

Mr. Gustavo NOGAMI

Federal Prosecutor/Administrative Chief
Prosecutor
Federal Prosecution in Mato Grosso State
Federal Prosecution Service of Brazil

Ms. Leakena SAUT

Official
Department of Legal Affairs, Complaint andInternational, Anti-Corruption Unit
Cambodia

Mr. Mohamed Shaaban KASSEM

Chief Prosecutor
Public Funds, Public Prosecution
Egypt

Mr. Dulat OMAR

Chief Prosecutor
Prosecutor’s Office of Korgalzhyn District
Kazakhstan

Mr. Abdulhamid Farooque LOW

Senior Investigations Officer
Asset Tracing, Ethics and Anti-Corruption
Commission
Kenya

Mr. Khamsone Sone
PHIMMASONE

Acting Chief of Inspection DivisionInspection Department, Ministry of Justice
Lao PDR

Mr. Tsiry Harivelo
RAZAFIMANDIMBYInspector and Advisor
General Direction, Independent Anti-Corruption
BureauMadagascar

25
Mr. Chrispin K.C KHUNGA

Director/Head of Legal and Prosecution
Anti-Corruption Bureau
MalawiMr. Westmoreland Anak AJOM

Assistant Commissioner
Forensic Division/Forensic Accounting Unit
Malaysian Anti Corruption Commission
Malaysia

Mr. Ismail NADEEM

Deputy HeadGeneral Investigation Department/Crime
Investigation Command
Maldives Police Service
Maldives

Mr. Pascoal Francisco JUSSA

Second Criminal Section
Nampula Superior Court of Appeal
Mozambique

Mr. Myo Zaw Win

Director
Bureau of Special Investigation
Ministry of Home Affairs
MyanmarMr. Gokul BANSTOLA

Under Secretary
Special Investigation Division, Commission for
the Investigation of Abuse of Authority
Nepal

Mr. Sada MOUSSA

Deputy Prosecutor
Specialized Judicial Centre
Niger

Mr. Abid Hussain KHAMISANI

Deputy District Public Prosecutor
Criminal Prosecution Service
Department of Law
Province of Sindh
Pakistan

Mr. Pare Kupson KUIAP

Legal Officer
Fraud & Anti-Corruption, Police
Papua New Guinea

Mr. Christopher Thomas Bautista
MESA

Executive Officer
Cagayan Valley Regional Office (CAVRO)
National Bureau of Investigation
Philippines

26
Mr. Adrian Bernard Conrad
SAMUELS

Prosecutor
Prosecutions, Anti-Corruption Commission
Sierra Leone

Ms. Kankanamge Medhavi
Anuradha SIRIWARDHANA

Assistant Director
Legal Division, Commission to Investigate
Allegations of Bribery or Corruption
Sri Lanka

Mr. Mahir Abdallah SHALLAKEY

DirectorSociety Security Police, Khartoum State Police
Sudan

Mr. Parviz
ODINAMAHMADZODA

Main Inspector
Main Department on Prevention of Corruption
Agency under the state financial control andfight against corruption
Tajikistan

Mr. Henrique Lopes SOARESPrevention Specialist
Prevention, Anti-Corruption Commission
Timor-Leste

Ms. Anna DZHAVAHA

Chief Specialist — Legal Counsel
International Law Division/Legal Department
National Anti-Corruption Bureau
UkraineMr. Oleksii GEIKO

Senior Detective
Main Detectives Department
National Anti-Corruption Bureau
UkraineMr. Matchanboy Sadullayevich
MATCHANOV

Judge
Mirabad District Court
Supreme Court
Uzbekistan

Ms. Yen Hai HOANG

Head of Criminal Law Division
Criminal Law Faculty
Hanoi Procuratorate University
Viet Nam

Ms. Charity MATUMBI

Acting General Manager
Legal Services Department
Zimbabwe Anti-Corruption Commission
Zimbabwe

27
Japanese Participants
Mr. NAGANO Kiminori

Judge
Hiroshima High Court, Okayama Branch

Ms. KURODA Maki

Judge
Niigata District Court

Mr. NISHIGAYA Yusuke

Prosecutor
Osaka District Public Prosecutors Office

Mr. BONO Yoshitaka

Prosecutor
Nagoya District Public Prosecutors Office
Toyohashi Branch

Mr. NAKAJIMA Kenichi

Prosecutor
Fukuoka District Public Prosecutors Office

Mr. SUGITA Mitsuhiro

Chief Inspector
Organized Crime Department, Criminal Affairs
BureauNational Police Agency

Mr. MURAKAMI Kaoru

Securities Investigator
Securities and Exchange SurveillanceCommission

28
INFORMATION ABOUT FORTHCOMING PROGRAMMES
1.

The Comparative Study of Myanmar and Japan to Improve Prison Management
From 25 February to 7 March 2019, UNAFEI will host the Comparative Study ofMyanmar and Japan to Improve Prison Management in Tokyo, Japan. Ten Myanmar prison
officials will participate in the study on the topic of prison management, including prison
work and vocational training.
2.

The Comparative Study of the Criminal Justice Systems of Japan and Nepal
From 5 to 16 March 2019, UNAFEI will host the Comparative Study on Criminal
Justice Systems of Japan and Nepal in Tokyo, Japan. Ten Nepalese participants will attend to
study and discuss “Challenges to the Implementation of the New Criminal Procedure Codeand the Sentencing and Execution Act in Nepal”.
3.

The 172nd International Training Course
From May to June 2019, UNAFEI will host the 172nd International Training Course inTokyo, Japan. The main theme of the course is the “Criminal Justice Responses to Trafficking
in Persons and Smuggling of Migrants”. Government officials from across Southeast Asia andother parts of the world, including Japan, and visiting experts and lecturers will attend.
4.

The Follow-up Seminar of the Third Country Training Programme for theDevelopment of Effective Community-Based Treatment of Offenders in the CLMVCountries
UNAFEI has provided significant resources for the Third Country Training Programme(TCTP) for the Development of Effective Community-Based Treatment of Offenders in the
CLMV Countries since the first phase of the TCTP in 2017. To follow-up on the third phaseof the TCTP, which was held in December 2018 in Thailand, UNAFEI will host the Followup Seminar from 22-24 April 2019. The purpose of the follow-up seminar is to review thestrategic plans for the establishment of effective community-based treatment of offenders in
Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar, and Viet Nam (the “CLMV” countries) which were developed
during the second phase of the TCTP.
5.

The 173rd International Training Course
From August to September 2019, UNAFEI will host the 173rd International Training
Course in Tokyo, Japan. The main theme of the course is “Tackling Violence against Womenand Children through Offender Treatment: Prevention of Reoffending (tentative)”.
Government officials from across Southeast Asia and other parts of the world, including
Japan, and visiting experts and lecturers will attend.

29
FACULTY AND STAFF OF UNAFEI
Faculty:
Mr. SETO Takeshi
Ms. ISHIHARA Kayo
Mr. FUTAGOISHI Ryo
Ms. KITAGAWA Mika
Mr. OTANI Junichiro
Mr. YAMADA Masahiro
Mr. HIRANO Nozomu
Mr. OHINATA Hidenori
Mr. WATANABE Hiroyuki
Dr. YAMAMOTO Mana
Mr. FURUHASHI Takuya
Mr. Thomas L. SCHMID
Secretariat:
Mr. FUJITA Takeshi
Mr. TOYODA Yasushi
Ms. KIKUCHI Yoshimi

Director
Deputy Director
Professor
171st Course Programming Officer
Professor
171st Course Deputy Programming Officer
Professor
Professor
Professor
Professor
Professor
Chief of Information and Public Relations
Professor
Chief of Research Division
Professor
Linguistic Adviser

Chief of Secretariat
Chief of Training and Hostel Management
Affairs Section
Chief of General and Financial Affairs
SectionGeneral and Financial Affairs Section:
Mr. KIGUCHI Ryo
Senior Officer
Mr. OHTA Masaru
Officer
Ms. TSUJII Yayoi
OfficerTraining and Hostel Management Affairs Section:
Ms. ODA Michie
Officer
171st Course Assistant Programming Officer
Mr. HIROSE Kentaro
Senior Officer
171st Course Assistant Programming Officer
Ms. NAGAHAMA Arisa
Senior Officer
Ms. KAMADA Mariko
OfficerMs. IINUMA Hazuki
Officer

30International Research Affairs Section:
Mr. SAITO Masato
Senior Officer
Ms. IWAKATA Naoko
Librarian
Secretarial Staff:
Ms. YAMADA Hisayo

Officer

Kitchen:Ms. ODAGIRI Maki

Chef

JICA Coordinator for the 171st International Training Course:
Ms. IDE Wakako
JICA

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