MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI(1 JANUARY 2001 - 31 DECEMBER 2001)
I. ROLE AND MANDATE
The Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI) was establishedin Tokyo, Japan in 1961 pursuant to an agreement between the United Nations and the Government of Japan. Its goal is
to contribute to sound social development in Asia and the Pacific region by promoting regional cooperation in the fieldof crime prevention and criminal justice, through training and research.
UNAFEI has paid utmost attention to the priority themes identified by the Commission on Crime Prevention andCriminal Justice. Moreover, UNAFEI has been taking up urgent, contemporary problems in the administration of criminal
justice in the region, especially problems generated by rapid socio-economic change (e.g., transnational organized crime,
corruption, economic and computer crime and the re-integration of prisoners into society) as the main themes and topics
for its training courses, seminars and research projects.
II. TRAINING
Training is the principal area and priority of the Institute’s work programmes. In the international training courses
and seminars, participants from different areas of criminal justice discuss and study pressing problems of criminal justiceadministration from various perspectives. They deepen their understanding, with the help of lectures and advice by the
UNAFEI faculty, visiting experts and ad hoc lecturers. This so-called “problem-solving through an integrated approach”
is one of the chief characteristics of UNAFEI programmes.
Each year, UNAFEI now conducts two international training courses (two months duration) and one internationalseminar (one month duration). Approximately 75 government officials from various overseas countries receive fellowships
from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA; a governmental agency for ODA programmes) each year toparticipate in all UNAFEI training programmes.
Training courses and seminars are attended by both overseas and Japanese participants. Overseas participants comenot only from the Asia-Pacific region but also from the Middle and Near East, Latin America and Africa. These participants
are experienced practitioners and administrators holding relatively senior positions in criminal justice fields.
During its 40 years of existence, UNAFEI has conducted a total of 119 international training courses and seminars,
in which approximately 2875 criminal justice personnel have participated, representing 100 different countries. In theirrespective countries, UNAFEI alumni have been playing leading roles and holding important posts in the fields of crime
prevention and the treatment of offenders, and in related organizations.
A. The 117th International Senior Seminar
1. Introduction
From 15 January to 16 February 2001, 23 participants from 18 countries attended the 117th International Senior
Seminar to examine the main theme of the “Current Situation and Countermeasures against Money Laundering”.
2. Methodology
Firstly, the Seminar participants respectively introduced the current situation regarding the role and function of
criminal justice agencies in their country in the fight against money laundering. Secondly, General Discussion Sessions
in the conference hall examined the subtopics of the main theme. In sum, the participants diligently and comprehensively
examined measures to strengthen and improve international cooperation in the fight against transnational organized crime.
This was accomplished primarily through comparative analysis of the current situation and problems of preventing money
laundering in the international arena. How modern criminal justice agencies are to respond to this emerging form of crime
through the use of mutual legal assistance and extradition was analyzed, in order to seek concrete recommendations. To
conduct each session efficiently, the UNAFEI faculty provided the following three topics for participant discussion:
Topic 1: Methods for Obtaining Intelligence for the Investigation of Money Laundering;
Topic 2: Components and Legal Framework for Combating Money Laundering: Current Situation, Problems andSolutions for an Asset Confiscation System

3

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2001
Topic 3: Current Situation of, Problems in and Solutions for the Use of Special Investigative Tools in Combating
Money Laundering.
A chairperson, co-chairperson, rapporteur and co-rapporteur were elected for each topic and organized the discussions
in relation to the above themes. In the conference hall, the participants and UNAFEI faculty seriously studied the designatedsubtopics and exchanged views. Final reports were compiled, based on the said discussions, and were ultimately adopted
as the reports of the Seminar. These reports have been printed in their entirety in UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 58.
3. Outcome Summary
Money laundering has become a global phenomenon and in this sense its growth has reflected recent rapid
technological advances. Although money laundering techniques have become more sophisticated and widespread a
number of countries do not have legislation to criminalize money laundering. Even those countries which do have such
legislation often have ineffective legislation or simply do not have the necessary infrastructure to deal with the problems
engendered by money laundering.
There are now three primary international instruments that provide countries with a framework within which tocombat money laundering. These are the United Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs andPsychotropic Substances 1988, the Forty Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force and the United Nations
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime (UN TOC) 2000. It is imperative to fully implement these instruments.
It is recognized that the main methods of investigation, used in money laundering cases, fall into three categories;
controlled delivery, electronic surveillance and undercover operations. Controlled delivery is often the only means ofidentifying those involved in predicate offences (such as drug trafficking) and money laundering. The use of undercover
operations and electronic surveillance requires a balance between the investigation of the criminal activity and theconstitutional rights of the individual.
In relation to the actual confiscation of proceedings there is a general lack of awareness and a lack of political will.
Specific problems identified were; countries’ confiscation laws have a narrow scope of application, the burden of proof
upon the state to prove that the assets result from money laundering is too onerous, there are a number of implementation
problems (e.g. banking confidentiality, lack of international cooperation, lack of procedural laws, lack of FIUs/STRs).
In consideration of the issues raised above the following are some of the recommendations which have been made:(i) A greater awareness must be generated about money laundering.
(ii) Introduce Financial Intelligence Units (FIUs) and Suspicious Transaction Reporting Systems (STRs).
(iii) Ensure that, where countries have STRs, these are broadened according to the individual situation of therespective country.
(iv) Sanctions should be created and imposed for non-disclosure of STRs and non-compliance with the guidelines
in submitting STRs.
(v) Each country should have a comprehensive proceeds of crime law which includes all serious crime. In particular,
a defendant should be required to prove the lawful origin of the alleged proceeds of serious crime or otherproperty liable for confiscation thereby shifting the burden of proof.
(vi) The bank secrecy laws should be amended to allow law enforcement agencies to obtain information concerning
the location of the proceeds of crime.
(vii) Financial institutions must be required to report suspicious transactions.
(viii) States must enter into multilateral and bilateral treaties in order that the confiscation of the proceeds of crime
can be properly carried out.
It is evident that anti-money laundering laws and systems need to be established on a worldwide level. This must act
hand in hand with increased training and a better exchange of information among countries in order to combat money
laundering. In addition, each country should work closely with its international partners in bilateral and multilateralassistance agreements to promote action to effectively address money laundering.

4

MAIN ACTIVITIES
B. The 118th International Training Course
1. Introduction
UNAFEI conducted the 118th International Training Course from 21 May to 12 July 2001 with the main theme,“Best Practices in the Institutional and Community-Based Treatment of Juvenile Offenders”. This Course consisted of
25 participants from 16 countries. The United Nations has recognized the prevalence of juvenile offending and at theTenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (April 2000, Vienna) it urged
for measures to be taken to address the root causes and risk factors related to juvenile delinquency. In particular theinternational community has accepted that the move towards restorative and community justice is a natural consequenceof a decreasing use of formal juvenile justice systems. Resultantly, UNAFEI, as a United Nations regional institute,decided to undertake this course looking specifically at the issue of the treatment of juvenile offenders both institutionallyand in the community.
2. Methodology
The participants examined measures to strengthen and improve practices in the institutional and community-based
treatment of juvenile offenders. This was accomplished primarily through comparative analysis of the current situationand problems of juvenile delinquency, juvenile correctional practice and the treatment of juvenile delinquents in thecommunity. By learning from the successes and failures of ever-implemented solutions (not only in the Asia-Pacificregion but also in other parts of the world), the best practices applicable and feasible in each participating country were
explored.
The objectives of the Course were primarily realized through the Individual Presentations and Group Workshop
sessions. In the former, each participant presented the actual situation, problems and future prospects of their country
with respect to the main theme of the Course. The Group Workshops further examined the subtopics of the main theme.
To facilitate discussion, the participants were divided into the following three groups under the guidance of faculty advisers:
Group 1: Best Practices in Delinquency Prevention;
Group 2: Best Practices in the Community-Based Treatment of Juvenile Offenders; andGroup 3: Best Practices in the Institutional Treatment of Juvenile Offenders.
Each group elected chairpersons and rapporteurs to organize the discussions. The group members seriously studied
the designated subtopics and exchanged their views based on information obtained through personal experience, theIndividual Presentations, lectures and so forth. Thirteen sessions were allocated for Group Discussion. In the fourth, fifth,
sixth and seventh week, Plenary Meetings were held to discuss the interim outline of the Group Workshop reports andto offer suggestions and comments. During the final Plenary Meetings in the seventh week, drafts of the Group Workshop
reports were examined and critiqued by all the participants and the UNAFEI faculty. Based on these discussions, theGroups further refined their reports and presented them in the Report-Back Sessions, where they were endorsed as thereports of the Course. The full texts of the reports will be published in the UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 59.
3. Outcome Summary
In the latter half of the last century there has been an increase in criminal activity among juveniles. It is recognized,
however, that stiffer penalties are not the required response despite public calls for such. Indeed empirical research showsthat harsher penalties can even increase re-offending. It is within this context that the institutional and community-based
treatment of juvenile delinquents must be expounded.
In considering the preferred model for the community-based treatment of juvenile offenders four guiding principles
were considered to be of fundamental importance. These principles were thought to be as follows;(i)

As far as possible, at least for juveniles of a certain age, the preferred option is to divert him or her at the precourt or court stage.
(ii) There should be a multi-disciplinary team to work on the best treatment option that will address the needs ofthe juvenile to help him or her remain in the community.
(iii) The multi-disciplinary team should influence the availability of community resources to support the juvenile
in conflict with the law.
(iv) The system should be one of through care for continuity of care and supervision of the juvenile.

5

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2001
It is recognized that effective delinquency prevention is based on what is called risk factor prevention whereby therisk factors of offending are identified and prevention methods are designed to counteract them. In particular, the“Communities That Care” (CTC) model developed by a research team at the University of Washington, USA stood out
as proving to be both flexible and applicable to various situations because it allows the needs and resources of eachparticular community to be taken into consideration when selecting appropriate programmes. This model provides aframework in which risk/protective factors are systematically targeted by programmes/policies with known efficacy.
In the arena of juvenile offending, most countries are facing problems related to overcrowded institutions, nonavailability of technical and professional staff, non-existent or non-professional parole system and no juvenile/family
courts, classification or juvenile training schools.
In response to the issues raised, the following recommendations are among those that were suggested:(i)Specialized training that a community-based corrections staff needs to address beyond his/her early years in
the corrections service should be developed. Thus, staff involved in the delivery of cognitive behavioral
programmes, multi-systemic therapy and so on should benefit from such training.
(ii) An offender-based information system should be established which allows for a systematic assessment of therisks and needs of each juvenile, an objective benchmarking of progress made by each offender and an analysisof the impact of treatment programmes and other casework intervention by Probation Officers, volunteers andother agencies working in partnership to achieve successful outcomes for the juvenile.
(iii) Community support is vital to the community-based treatment of juveniles and can only be achieved byenhancing public confidence in the treatment system by means such as using volunteers and developing a clear
public relations strategy.
(iv) A National Board should be established with representatives from governmental and non-governmental agencies
such as criminal justice, social welfare, health services, education and community services.
(v) The principal actor in delinquency prevention should be the Community Board which should consist of membersof the community such as principals of local schools, active parents, programmes managers of local social
service agencies, local probation officers, local police chiefs and local public health nurses.
(vi) Delinquency prevention programmes should be implemented by direct service providers (e.g. criminal justiceprofessionals, nurses, teachers, social workers, drug therapists, volunteers, etc.) under the guidance of theCommunity Board.
(vii) Consideration should be given to establishing Juvenile Classification Homes, Juvenile Training Schools andJuvenile Medical Training Schools on one campus, close to the Juvenile Court in order to avoid operational
problems.
The role of the United Nations was appreciated in that it has provided standard practices and international instruments
such as the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the Beijing Rules and the Riyadh Guidelines. At the same time newly
emerging concepts like “risk management” and “restorative justice” provide platforms upon which all those involved in
the treatment of juveniles can invigorate their discussions and so develop a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary approachto juvenile delinquency prevention and treatment.
C. The 119th International Training Course
1. Introduction
From 10 September to 1 November 2001, UNAFEI conducted the 119th International Training Course with the main
theme, “Current Situation of and Countermeasures against Transnational Organized Crime”. This Course consisted of
27 participants from 15 countries. This training course coincided with a historic change in the attitude of the world tochallenging international organized crime. The entire perspective with which countries around the world approachinternational organized crime changed forever after the atrocities in the USA on 11 September 2001, the second day ofthis course.
The Course further proved to be significant and timely in that it was held when the United Nations Convention on
Transnational Organized Crime (hereinafter the “UN TOC Convention”) is soon expected to enter into force by ratificationof the many member states. The General Assembly adopted the UN TOC Convention in November 2000 and last December,in Palermo, Italy, the Convention was signed by more than 120 countries. At present 132 countries have already signed
and 10 of these countries are represented by the participants’ countries.

6

MAIN ACTIVITIES
2. Methodology
The participants examined the current trends and issues in investigating organized crimes, particularly the expansionof investigative techniques in the areas of electronic surveillance, controlled delivery, undercover operations, immunity
systems and witness and victim protection programmes. Drug trafficking, money laundering, use of violence and extortion,acts of corruption, trafficking in women and children, illicit manufacturing of and trafficking in firearms, the illegal
trafficking and transportation of migrants, computer-related crime, and the illegal trafficking in stolen vehicles, perpetrated
under the influence of criminal organizations, have been serious problems throughout the world, including Asia and thePacific region. It is further recognized that transnational organized crime is increasing in the global community at a ratethat demands action from all agencies concerned.
The objectives were primarily realized through the Individual Presentations and the Group Workshop sessions. In
the former, each participant presented the actual situation, problems and future prospects of their country with respect tothe main theme of the Course. The Group Workshops further examined the subtopics of the main theme. To facilitate
discussions, the participants were divided into the following three groups, with two focus areas respectively, under theguidance of faculty advisers:
Group 1: (i) Analysis of the current situation of illicit drug trafficking(ii) Tools facilitating the investigation of transnational organized crime.
Group 2: (i) Analysis of the current situation of illegal firearms trafficking and human (women, children, migrants)
trafficking(ii) Criminalization of participation in an organized criminal group and conspiracy, immunity systems,
and witness and victim protection programmesGroup 3: (i) Analysis of the current situation of money laundering.
(ii) Countermeasures against money laundering.
Each group elected a chairperson(s) and rapporteur(s) to organize the discussions. The group members seriously
studied the designated subtopics and exchanged their views based on information obtained through personal experience,
the Individual Presentations, lectures and so forth. Twelve sessions were allocated for Group discussion.
In weeks six and seven Plenary Meetings were held to discuss the interim outline of the Group Workshop reports
and to offer suggestions and comments. During the Plenary Meetings, drafts of the Group Workshop reports were examined
and critiqued by all the participants and the UNAFEI faculty. Based on these discussions, the Groups further refined theirreports and presented them in the Report-Back Sessions, where they were endorsed as the reports of the Course. The
reports will be published in full in the UNAFEI Resource Material Series No. 59.
3. Outcome Summary
Illicit drug trafficking is accelerating at an unprecedented pace, spreading very rapidly across the globe, as a resultof rapid globalization. The information technology revolution has reduced the world to a small village and has madecommunication exceptionally fast and easy. The drug trafficker has found very useful tools to reach his desired destination
with ease and with a high degree of secrecy, speed and specificity (three S’s). The recent increase in the scope, intensity
and sophistication of crime around the world threatens the safety of citizens everywhere and hampers countries in theirsocial, economic and cultural development.
Illegal firearms’ trafficking has recently developed into a serious problem. Many of the firearms are mainly smuggled
for internal use of one nation. However, there are certain amounts of firearms that have been smuggled by criminal groups
for making profit as well as for fueling the operation of international terrorism. Basically there are three categories ofcountry involved in this type of trafficking as follows; illegal manufacturing countries, transit countries and effected
countries.
Human trafficking, especially in women, children and migrants is another area that has increased recently in termsof volume and practice. The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimated that the global human trafficking
industry generates up to US$ 8 billion each year from this “trade on human misery.” Nearly 2 million children are abused
and trafficked globally every year. Basically, there are 2 categories of country involved in this human trafficking asfollows; source countries and destination counties. Further there are two types of human trafficking; those engaged inforced labor (including prostitution) and those persons voluntarily engaged in illegal work, the so-called illegal immigrants.

7

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2001
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has estimated that the aggregate size of money laundering in the world could
be somewhere between two to five percent of the world’s gross domestic product (GDP). Money laundering operations
basically consist of three phases or stages. The first phase is the “placement” i.e. where cash enters the financial system.
The second phase consists of “layering” i.e. where the money is routed through a number of transactions so that any
attempt to trace the origin of money is lost. The last or the third phase consists of “integration” i.e. the money is broughtback into the economy with the appearance of legitimacy and thus, integrated within the lawful economy leaving no traceof the illegal money for the various law enforcement agencies of the different countries.
Among the suggested countermeasures against transnational organized crime, the following were suggested;(i)Specialized training should be provided to personnel involved in the investigation of transnational organizedcrime.
(ii) Optimum finances must be provided to train specialized personnel and suitably equip them.
(iii) Specific legislation must be implemented to define all terms (such as wiretapping, controlled delivery andundercover operations) and lay down general procedures for those investigating transnational organized crime.
(iv) International cooperation must be fostered especially in the area of controlled delivery where it has been seen
to be lacking.
(v) All states should have legislation which criminalizes conspiracy and/or participation in an organized criminalgroup (see Article 5 of the TOC Convention).
(vi) The use of immunity systems must be sensitive to a country’s culture, history, national sentiment and domestic
laws as there are both benefits and drawbacks in the use of such systems depending on the specific nationalsituation. States should however strive to implement the provisions contained within Article 26 of the TOC
Convention.
(vii) Countries should adopt measures that guarantee the protection of witnesses as stipulated in Article 25 of the
TOC Convention.
(viii) In order to detect money laundering in the most effective way, it is important to obtain illegal proceeds at an
early stage and identification of persons at the time of opening his or her bank account is imperative.
(ix) Asset forfeiture systems should be developed in countries.
(x) Professional “gatekeepers” (e.g. lawyers and accountants) should be required to identify their clients and channel
any suspicious transactions to the relevant financial intelligence unit or face sanctions accordingly.
The rapid growth in transnational organized crime and the complexity of the investigation requires a truly global
response. At present, the measures adopted to counter organized crime are not only predominantly national, but also
different from one country to another. It is, thus, absolutely imperative to increase global cooperation between the world
law enforcement agencies and to continue to develop the tools which will help them effectively in countering transnationalorganized crime, including money laundering.
D. Special Seminars and Courses
1. Sixth Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s Republic of China
The Sixth Special Seminar for Senior Officials of Criminal Justice in the People’s Republic of China, entitled“International Cooperation in Criminal Matters”, was held from 26 February to 16 March 2001. Ten senior criminal
justice officials and the UNAFEI faculty comparatively discussed contemporary problems faced by China and Japan in
the realization of criminal justice.
2. Second Special Seminar for Kenya on Juvenile Delinquent Treatment Systems
UNAFEI conducted the Second Special Seminar for Kenyan criminal justice officials who are working for theprevention of delinquency and the treatment of juvenile delinquents in their country. The Seminar, entitled “Juvenile
Delinquent Treatment Systems”, was held from 5 November to 29 November 2001. The Seminar exposed eighth Kenyan
officials to the workings of the Japanese juvenile justice and treatment system through lectures and observation visits torelevant agencies. As a result of this comparative study, the officials successfully developed action plans for the
implementation and development of institutional and community-based treatment systems for juvenile delinquents in
Kenya.
3. Fourth Special Training Course on Corruption Control in Criminal Justice
UNAFEI conducted the Fourth Special Training Course entitled “Corruption Control in Criminal Justice” from 5
November to 30 November 2001. In this course, twelve foreign officials engaged in corruption control comparatively

8MAIN ACTIVITIES
analyzed the current situation of corruption, methods of corruption prevention, and measures to enhance international
cooperation in this regard.

9

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2001
III. TECHNICAL COOPERATION
A. Joint Seminars
Since 1981, UNAFEI has conducted 23 joint seminars under the auspices of JICA and in collaboration with hostgovernments in Asia and the Pacific. With the participation of policy-makers and high-ranking administrators, including
members of academia, the joint seminars attempt to provide a discussion forum in which participants can share theirviews and jointly seek solutions to various problems currently facing criminal justice administration in both the hostcountry and Japan.
1. Kenya-UNAFEI Joint Seminar
The Kenya-UNAFEI Joint Seminar was held in Nairobi on the theme of “Effective Administration of Juvenile Justice”
from 14 to 17 August 2001. The Government of Kenya, JICA and UNAFEI organized the Joint Seminar. There wereabout one hundred participants from the police, prosecution, judiciary and the prison, probation and children’s departments
in Kenya. The Seminar focused on the role of the police, prosecution and the judiciary in juvenile justice and analyzed
how coordination between the relevant agencies involved in juvenile justice could be improved. The UNAFEI delegationconsisted of 6 members of UNAFEI as well as a member of the Japanese Family Court and the Japanese Police.
2. Philippines-UNAFEI Joint Seminar
The Philippines-UNAFEI Joint Seminar was held in Manila under the theme of “Community Involvement in the
Criminal Justice Administration” from 5 to 8 December 2001. The Government of the Republic of the Philippines, JICA
and UNAFEI organized the Joint Seminar. Over 200 local participants including lawyers, government officials, nongovernmental representatives and members of the judiciary and the police attended the Seminar. The UNAFEI delegationconsisted of the Director, the Deputy Director, four professors, the Linguistic Advisor, a member of the Secretariat andan official from the National Police Agency of Japan. The Seminar concluded with the adoption of recommendations on
enhancing community involvement in criminal justice administrations.
B. Regional Training Programmes
1. Thailand
In January 2001, UNAFEI dispatched the Deputy Director and a professor to Thailand to assist the Office of the
Narcotics Control Board (ONCB) in organizing the Ninth Regional Training Course on “Effective Countermeasuresagainst Drug Offences and the Advancement of Criminal Justice Administration.”
2. Costa Rica
In July 2001, UNAFEI dispatched the Deputy Director and a professor to Costa Rica to attend the Third International
Training Course on “Effective Treatment Measures to Facilitate Reintegration into Society”, organized and hosted by
the Government of Costa Rica through the United Nations Latin American Institute for the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders (ILANUD).
C. Others
In July and August 2001, two UNAFEI professors were dispatched to Kenya to assist the Children’s Department of
the Ministry of Home Affairs and National Heritage in a project to develop nationwide standards for the treatment ofjuvenile offenders.
IV. COMPARATIVE RESEARCH PROJECT
Reflecting its emphasis on the systematic relevance of training activities and priority themes identified by the UN
Commission, the research activities of the Institute are designed to meet practical needs, including those for training
materials for criminal justice personnel.
V. INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION SERVICES
The Institute continues to collect data and other resource materials on crime trends, crime prevention strategies andthe treatment of offenders, from Asia, the Pacific, Africa, Europe and the Americas, and makes use of this informationin its training courses and seminars. The Information and Library Service of the Institute has been providing, upon request,
materials and information to United Nations agencies, governmental organizations, research institutes and researchers,
both domestic and foreign.

10MAIN ACTIVITIES
VI. PUBLICATIONS
Reports on training courses and seminars are published regularly by the Institute. Since 1971, the Institute has issued
the Resource Material Series, which contains contributions by the faculty members, visiting experts and participants of
UNAFEI courses and seminars. In 2001, the 56th, 57th and 58th editions of the Resource Material Series were published,
as was “The Global Challenge of High-Tech Crime”, a book presenting the results of the Workshop on Crimes Related
to the Computer Network at the Tenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders
held in Vienna, Austria in April 2000. In December 2001 the results of the Nepal-UNAFEI Joint Seminar on “Effective
Countermeasures to Combat Organized Crime in Criminal Justice Processses” (held in Kathmandu, Nepal in December
2000) was also published. Additionally, issues 104 to 106 of the UNAFEI Newsletter were published, including a briefreport on each course and seminar (from the 117th to the 119th respectively) and providing other timely information.
VII. OTHER ACTIVITIES
A. Public Lecture Programme
On 2 February 2001, the Public Lecture Programme was conducted in the Grand Conference Hall of the Ministry ofJustice. In attendance were many distinguished guests, UNAFEI alumni and the 117th International Seminar participants.
This Programme was jointly sponsored by the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF), the Japan Criminal Policy
Society (JCPS) and UNAFEI.
Public Lecture Programmes increase the public’s awareness of criminal justice issues, through comparativeinternational study, by inviting distinguished speakers from abroad. This year, Mr. Peter H. Wilkitzki (Director-General,
Criminal Affairs Bureau, Federal Ministry of Justice, Germany) and Ms. Susan L. Smith (Senior Trial Attorney andInternational Money Laundering Counsel, Asset Forfeiture and Money laundering Section, Criminal Division, US
Department of Justice, the United States of America) were invited as speakers to the Programme. They delivered lectures
respectively entitled “Criminal Law Sanctions in Germany: Facts and Trends” and “Money Laundering: Trends andTechniques”.
B. Assisting UNAFEI Alumni Activities
Various UNAFEI alumni associations in several countries have commenced, or are about to commence, research
activities in their respective criminal justice fields. It is, therefore, one of the important tasks of UNAFEI to support thesecontributions to improve the crime situation internationally.
C. Overseas Missions
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa (Deputy Director) and Mr. Chikara Satou (Professor) represented UNAFEI at the “9th Regional
Training Course on Effective Countermeasures against Drug Offences and the Advancement of Criminal Justice
Administration” convened by the Office of the Narcotics Control Board (ONCB), Thailand. Mr. Keiichi Aizawa and Mr.
Chikara Satou presented expert lectures on the role of the confiscation of illicit proceeds and anti-money launderingsystems in combating drug trafficking. The Training Course was held in Thailand from 14 January to 27 January 2001.
Mr. Mikinao Kitada (Director) represented UNAFEI and was a member of the Japanese delegation at the Tenth United
Nations Commission on the Prevention of Crime and Criminal Justice held in Vienna, Austria from 8 May to 17 May 2001.
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa (Deputy Director) attended the First Asia Cyber Crime Summit which was held in Hong Kongfrom 24 April to 27 April 2001. Mr. Keiichi Aizawa presented a lecture as a panelist at this Summit.
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe (Professor) attended the Seminar on Forfeiting the Proceeds of Crime and presented a lecture.
This Seminar was hosted by the Asset Forfeiture and Money Laundering Section of the United States Department ofJustice and the Anti-Money Laundering Office of Thailand. It was held from 15 May to 18 May 2001 in Thailand.
Mr. Hiroshi Tsutomi (Professor) attended the Ad Hoc Expert Group Meeting on Criminal Justice Statistics as anexpert. This Meeting was held in Buenos Aires, Argentina from 23 April to 25 April 2001.
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa (Deputy Director) and Mr. Kenji Teramura (Professor) visited Costa Rica from 14 July to 28
July 2001 where they presented lectures on behalf of UNAFEI at the Third International Training Course on Effective
Treatment Measures to Facilitate Reintegration into Society.

11

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2001
Mr. Mikinao Kitada (Director), Mr. Yuuichirou Tachi (Professor) and Mr. Kunihiko Suzuki (Staff) visited the People’s
Republic of China from15 July to 22 July 2001 for the purpose of fostering international exchange between the respective
criminal justice administrations.
Mr. Hiroshi Tsutomi (Professor) and Mr. Kei Someda visited Kenya as short-term experts, as part of a JICA
international assistance scheme providing special support to the Children’s Department of Kenya from 24 July to 14
September 2001.
Ms. Sue Takasu (Professor) attended the Inter-Governmental Open-Ended Expert Group Meeting to Prepare Draft
Terms of Reference for the Negotiation of an International Legal Instrument against Corruption in her capacity as arepresentative of the Japanese Government, from 30 July 2001 to 3 August 2001.
Mr. Mikinao Kitada (Director), Mr. Toru Miura (Professor), Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe (Professor) and Ms. Mikiko Kakihara(Professor) formed the UNAFEI delegation which attended the joint Kenya-UNAFEI Seminar in Nairobi, Kenya from
6 August to 22 August 2001.
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe (Professor) attended the International Association of Prosecutors’ Annual Conference in Sydney,
Australia from 1 September to 8 September 2001 where he made a presentation to the conference.
Mr. Keiichi Aizawa (Deputy Director) participated in the Seminar on Extradition and Mutual Legal Assistance as avisiting lecturer in Laos from 22 September to 1 October 2001.
Mr. Mikinao Kitada (Director) attended the 17th Law-Asia Conference held in Christchurch, New Zealand from 3
October to 8 October 2001 where he was invited to speak at two of the sub-sessions.
Mr. Kenji Teramura (Professor) acted as an observer at the 21st Asian and Pacific Conference of Correctional
Administrators which was held in Cheng Mai, Thailand from 20 October to 27 October 2001.
D. Assisting ACPF Activities
UNAFEI cooperates and corroborates with the ACPF to further improve crime prevention and criminal justiceadministration in the region. Since UNAFEI and the ACPF have many similar goals, and a large part of ACPF’s membershipconsist of UNAFEI alumni, the relationship between the two is very strong.
VIII. HUMAN RESOURCES
A. Staff
In 1970, the Government of Japan assumed full financial and administrative responsibility for running the Institute.
The Director, Deputy Director and seven professors are selected from among public prosecutors, the judiciary, corrections
and probation. UNAFEI also has approximately 20 administrative staff members, who are appointed from among officialsof the Government of Japan, and a linguistic adviser. Moreover, the Ministry of Justice invites visiting experts fromabroad to each training course and seminar. The Institute has also received valuable assistance from various experts,
volunteers and related agencies in conducting its training programmes.
B. Faculty Changes
Mr. Hiroshi Iitsuka, formerly Professor of UNAFEI and Chief of Training Division, was transferred to the Matsudo
Branch of the Chiba District Court on 1 April 2001.
Mr. Akihiro Nosaka, formerly Professor of UNAFEI and Chief of Information and Library Service Division, wastransferred to the Chiba Probation Office on 1 April 2001.
Mr. Shinya Watanabe, formerly Professor of UNAFEI and Chief of Research Division, was transferred to Fuchu
Prison on 1 April 2001.
Mr. Chikara Satou, formerly Professor of UNAFEI, was transferred to the Hachioji Branch of the Tokyo District
Prosecutors Office on 1 April 2001.

12

MAIN ACTIVITIES
Mr. Toru Miura, formerly a Judge at the Kushiro District Court, joined UAFEI as a Professor and the Chief of Training
Division 1 April 2001.
Mr. Kenji Teramura, formerly a Senior Researcher with the Takamatsu Regional Headquarters, joined UNAFEI as
a Professor and Chief of Research Division 1 April 2001.
Mr. Kei Someda, formerly a Senior Researcher at the First Research Department, joined UNAFEI as a Professor andChief of Information and Library Service Division on 1 April 2001.
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe, formerly a Prosecutor with the Tokyo District Prosecutors Office, joined UNAFEI as a Professoron 1 April 2001.
Ms. Sue Takasu, formerly a Prosecutor with the Yokohama District Prosecutors Office, joined UNAFEI as a Professoron 1 April 2001.
Ms. Rebecca Findlay-Debeck left her position as a linguistic advisor at UNAFEI on 1 April 2001 and was replaced
by Mr. Sean Eratt, a Solicitor from England.
IX. FINANCESThe Ministry of Justice primarily provides the Institute’s budget. The total amount of the UNAFEI budget isapproximately ¥351 million yen per year. Additionally, JICA and the ACPF provides assistance for the Institute’s
international training courses and seminars.

13