A Note on the 13th Training Course:“The Criminal Justice Response to Corruption”
Izumi Kumiko, Professor, UNAFEI

1.

Introduction
UNAFEI conducted the 13th International Training Course on the Criminal

Justice Response to Corruption from October 18 to November 12, 2010 with 17
overseas participants from 16 countries and six domestic participants (of which twowere observers). In this note, I would like to overview the Course as its Programming
Officer.
2.

Summary of the Major Topics and an Outline of the Programme
The programme aimed to contribute to crime prevention and the improvement anddevelopment of criminal justice systems in the participants’ countries by discussing (i)possible solutions to corruption in their respective criminal justice systems and (ii)methods to strengthen the respective systems against corruption. It was also hoped thatthe participants would share their experiences and ideas and create an international
network of counterparts which would enable the continuous exchange of information inorder to improve practices in each country.
Firstly, the participants explained the current corruption situation andcountermeasures in their respective countries and shared the problems that they face.
Then, Mr. Demostenes Chryssikos from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime(UNODC) gave a lecture on the United Nations Convention against Corruption(UNCAC), which provides international guidelines for measures against corruption. He
also explained the UNODC’s anti-corruption efforts at the international level. Lecturers
were invited from Singapore and Hong Kong, where measures against corruption haveproduced successful results: Mr. Koh Teck Hin, Deputy Director of the CorruptPractices Investigation Bureau, Singapore and Mr. Steven Lam, Acting Assistant
Director of the Independent Commission against Corruption, the Hong Kong Special
Administrative Region explained the effective measures against corruption currently
1implemented in their respective jurisdictions. Japanese experts in corruption
investigations also gave lectures and explained measures against corruption in Japan.
Following the lectures, the participants were split into two groups and discussed
measures against corruption from the standpoints of corruption prevention andcorruption investigations, respectively. They then summarized and presented theirrecommendations on measures best implemented at the national level in order toeradicate corruption.
The group which discussed anti-corruption measures from the corruption
prevention standpoint explained that a strong political will, which enjoys popularsupport, is needed to eradicate corruption. They then recommended that laws whichstrengthen anti-corruption measures should be developed based on that political will andthat an anti-corruption organization independent of political influence should beestablished to enforce the laws.
From the corruption investigation standpoint, the other group recommended that awitness protection programme should be established and that data from Financial
Intelligence Units (FIUs) should be actively utilized as one source of information, inorder to take rigorous action against corruption, to execute proper criminal
investigations and to successfully prove that crimes have been committed.
3.

Conclusion
The programme was attended by participants from Afghanistan, Botswana, Brazil,

the Democratic Republic of the Congo, El Salvador, Indonesia, Iraqi Kurdistan, Mexico,Nepal, Pakistan, Paraguay, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Vietnam andZimbabwe. Partly because this was the first programme where I served as aprogramming officer, I had some concerns about whether or not it would be possible forparticipants from different countries with different legal systems and problems todiscuss the same issues and make meaningful proposals. However, as the programme
proceeded, it turned such concerns were unfounded.
Every participant wished to obtain useful information and knowledge in order toachieve his or her wish of eradicating corruption and creating a better society in theirrespective countries. Therefore, they gave candid explanations of their countries’ current
2

situations, were proactive in seeking information from the lecturers and participated in
the discussions. Their enthusiasm in committing themselves to all kinds of activities in
addition to absorbing knowledge impressed me. The participants continued exchanging
views after the official daily programme was concluded and deepened the trust among
them day by day. This created a virtuous circle: the deepened trust enabled more frankexchanges of opinion and deeper discussions within the official daily programme, which
in turn built further trust among the participants. At the end of the course, oneparticipant stated, “Knowing that my colleagues are working in their respective
countries towards the shared goal of creating corruption-free countries motivates me towork harder.” All the other participants agreed with him.
The programme aimed to provide an opportunity for the participants to share theiraspirations, rather than simply disseminate knowledge and information, and this was themost important result that we achieved. I would like to sincerely thank the participants
for allowing me to experience an occasion when people from various countries wereunited in the wish to eradicate corruption. They inspired me to do my best as a criminal
justice practitioner and to emulate their competency in my work.

3