No. 110
February 2003

Established1961
IN THIS ISSUE
Page

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

THE 123RD INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR.............................................................................................. 3

THE PROTECTION OF VICTIMS OF CRIME AND THE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF VICTIMSIN THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE PROCESS SPECIFICALLY CONSIDERING RESTORATIVEJUSTICE APPROACHES
Seminar Rationale........................................................................................................................................... 3
Seminar Summary........................................................................................................................................... 7
Lecture Topics ................................................................................................................................................. 8
Individual Presentation Topics ......................................................................................................................10
General Discussion Paper ..............................................................................................................................12
Observation Visits......................................................................................................................................... 17Group Study Tour ..........................................................................................................................................18
Special Events ................................................................................................................................................19
Reference Materials Distributed....................................................................................................................21
Visiting Experts ............................................................................................................................................25
Participants.....................................................................................................................................................25
FIFTH TRAINING COURSE ON CORRUPTION CONTROL ...............................................................................28
INDONESIA-UNAFEI JOINT SEMINAR.................................................................................................................33
INFORMATION ABOUT PROGRAMMES & ACTIVITIES..................................................................................36
Training Programmes............................................................................................................................. 36
The 124th International Training Course........................................................................................36
The 125th International Training Course........................................................................................38
Eighth Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People's Republic ofChina ...............................................................................................................................................39
Second Seminar on Judicial System for Tajikistan......................................................................39
Overseas Trips by Staff..................................................................................................................................39
FACULTY & STAFF OF UNAFEI ............................................................................................................................41

UNAFEI IS AN AFFILIATED REGIONAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNITED NATIONS

1

LETTER FROM THE DIRECTOR

It is my privilege to inform readers of the successful completion of the 123rd
International Senior Seminar on, “The Protection of Victims of Crime and the Active
Participation of Victims in the Criminal Justice Process specifically considering Restorative
Justice Approaches” held from 14 January to 13 February 2003. In this Seminar, we welcomed
6 Japanese and 16 overseas participants: 11 from Asia, 1 from Oceania, 2 from Latin
America, and 2 from North Africa. They included police officers, public prosecutors, judges,
correctional officers and other high-ranking public officials. As this newsletter demonstrates,
the Seminar was extremely productive. It consisted of Individual Presentations, Group
Discussion sessions, visits to relevant criminal justice agencies, and presentations by visiting
experts and ad hoc lecturers.
During the five-week period, the participants diligently and comprehensively examinedthe current situation and problems in relation to the protection of victims of crime and the active
participation of victims in the criminal justice system considering specifically the possibilities
and problems that exist in restorative justice approaches. As you can read in the general
discussion paper printed in this newsletter, the participants produced a number of concise andpractical recommendations on the issues of both support and protection of victims of crime andrestorative justice approaches.
Traditionally victims have been given little attention and paid scant regard in thecriminal justice process. Their main role has often been limited merely to being witnesses.
Although the term “victimology” came into our vocabulary in the 1940’s, measures for thevictim were not really developed until the 1960’s in a number of Western countries. The
fundamental need for the criminal justice system to protect victims of crime was recognized by
the United Nations by the adoption of the “Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuseof Power” at the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders in 1985. This acted as an impetus for the international community toconsider the domestic situations of member states in relation to the role, support and protectionof victims of crime.
The development of victim support and protection heavily influenced the restorative
justice approaches that had been growing, in the modern context, since 1974. Globally,
countries are now creating fresh restorative approaches to justice as well as looking to thehistories of their own societies where restorative justice was often practiced. Despite this, it has
to be recognized that a number of countries throughout the world do not properly encourage theparticipation of victims in the criminal justice process and these countries need to strengthen
their system of victim protection and, in turn, improve their restorative justice policies.
.

2

I would like to offer my sincere congratulations to all the participants for their successful
completion of the Seminar, made possible by their strenuous efforts. My heartfelt gratitude goesto 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 byvarious agencies and institutions, which helped diversify the programme.
A warm tribute must be paid to the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) for
its immeasurable support throughout the Seminar. At the same time, I must express great
appreciation to the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF) and its branch organizations fortheir substantial contributions. Lastly, I owe my gratitude to all the individuals whose unselfish
efforts behind the scenes contributed significantly to the successful realization of this Seminar.
Upon returning to their home countries, 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 nation's criminal justice systems, and to the benefit of theinternational society as a whole.
Finally, I would like to reiterate my best regards to the participants of the 123rd
International Senior Seminar. I hope that the experience they gained during the Seminar proves
valuable in their daily work, and that the bonds fostered among the participants, visiting experts,
lecturers and UNAFEI staff will continue to grow for years to come.

February 2003

Kunihiko Sakai
Director, UNAFEI

3

THE 123RD INTERNATIONAL SENIOR SEMINAR“THE PROTECTION OF VICTIMS OF CRIME AND THE ACTIVEPARTICIPATION OF VICTIMS IN THE CRIMIANAL JUSTICE PROCESSSPECIFICALLY CONSIDERING RESTORATIVE JUSTICE APPROACHES”

Seminar Rationale

The status of victims of crime had been given little attention in the criminal justiceprocess from the beginnings of the modern criminal justice system to recent years. However,after the term “victimology” came into the world in the 1940s, based on the research of theactual situation of victims of crime, we had to face the serious problem of how to protect ofvictims of crime in the criminal justice system. The findings showed that, although the victim
was the person who was the most strongly affected by the offence, there had been little
attention paid to the protection of the rights, the interests and the legal status of the victim in
the criminal justice system except in very exceptional cases. A common view regarding the
deficiencies in the fairness of the system to victims of crime under the criminal justice system
was developed. Policies and measures for the victim were developed in the following threestages, mainly in the Western countries after the 1960s.
The first stage was the establishment of a system of monetary support for the victim(1960s). New Zealand was the first country that enacted a law to give monetary support to thevictim and other Western countries followed this. Through these efforts, the basis ofmonetary support for the victim by the national government was established. The second
stage was the strengthening of immediate and direct support for the victim (1970s). From thistime, immediate and direct support to the victim was started to be given by non-profit
organizations such as Victim Support in the UK, the National Organization for Victim
Assistance in the USA and by the governmental sectors. Since various kinds of research was
conducted on the actual situation of the victim in this era, the idea was widely accepted thatthe improvement of the legal status of the victim and the establishment of the rights of thevictim were essential for an effective management of the criminal justice system. Based on
this principle, the third stage was the enactment of statutes for the improvement of the legal
status of the victim and the establishment of the rights of the victim. The Western and some
Asian countries realized the following rights through various kinds of laws and statutes suchas the right to receive fair treatment, respect of dignity and privacy of the victim in thecriminal justice process, the right to receive information about criminal justice proceedings,
the right to attend to trails, the right of protection from threats and revenge and the right ofcompensation and reparation.
In Japan, a law was enacted to give monetary support to the victim in 1980 and laws
for the improvement of the legal status of the victim were enacted and amended in 2000. The
enactment and amendment of 2000 abolished the limitation period for complaints in sexual
offences, allows a victim to make an victim impact statement in the trial process, gives
consideration for the victim in the process of examination of a witness and attendance at thetrial, gives authority to the court record as an enforceable title of obligation when it records a
civil agreement between victim and offender. Furthermore, the information providing system
to the victim by the police and public prosecutor’s office has also been upgraded.

4

Under these circumstances, “The Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime andAbuse of Power” was adopted in the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of
Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1985. The Principles require nations and nationals
to have sympathy and respect for the victim. For example, the Principles provide for the rightof swift restoration of loss caused by crime, the right to receive information about thecriminal justice procedure and participation in the procedure and consideration forstrengthening various kinds of victim support.
As victim protection and support gained ground, the restorative justice approach also
emerged as a new concept to tackle problems which the criminal justice system was failing toaddress. The restorative justice approach is one which considers the loss caused by crime
through the active participation of the victim, offender and the community.
Restorative justice has been defined in numerous ways. Professor Umbreit defines
restorative justice as “a victim-centered response to crime that provides, opportunities for
those most directly affected by crime - the victim, the offender, their families, andrepresentatives of the community - to be directly involved in responding to the harm causedby the crime. Restorative justice is based upon values which emphasize the importance ofproviding opportunities for more active involvement in the process of offering support andassistance to victims of crime; holding offenders directly accountable to the people andcommunities they have violated; restoring the emotional and material losses of victims (to thedegree possible); providing a range of opportunities for dialogue and problem solving amonginterested victims of crime, offenders, families, and other support persons; offering offenders
opportunities for competency development and reintegration into productive community life;and strengthening public safety through community building.” In this seminar, we shallconsider the concept of restorative justice in a manner wider than any strict meaning.
Restorative justice has existed since ancient times, but was rekindled in the West by
the establishment of an experimental victim-offender reconciliation programme in Canada in
1974. After that there was a rapid growth of these programmes to more than 1,000 in North
America, Europe, Southern Hemisphere countries such as New Zealand, Australia and South
Africa. Some Asian countries have also tried to introduce these programmes. In addition,some countries have introduced restorative justice by statute. For instance, the New Zealandgovernment introduced family group conferences (FGC) for young offenders in the Children
and Young Persons Act of 1989. FGCs were made available for adult offenders in New
Zealand in 1995. Following that, the United Kingdom also introduced a similar concept in theform of the referral order for young offenders in the Youth Justice and Criminal Evidence
Act of 1999. Youth offender panels were introduced which perform the same functions as
FGCs.
Under these circumstances, “The Vienna Declaration on Crime and Justice: Meeting
the Challenges of the Twenty-first Century” was adopted by the Tenth United Nations
Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held in Vienna in April
2000. The Declaration provides that, “We decide to introduce, where appropriate, national,
regional and international action plans in support of victims of crime, such as mechanisms formediation and restorative justice, …. and we encourage the development of restorative justicepolicies, procedures and programmes that are respectful of the rights, needs and interests ofvictims, offenders, communities and all other parties.” Based on this Declaration, the working
group of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice has drafted “Basic

5principles on the use of restorative justice programmes in criminal matters” as a United
Nations standard for restorative justice (see attached reference material).
However, we find that major parts of Asian, African and Central and Southern
American countries do not have adequate systems for the protection of victims of crime anddo not sufficiently encourage active participation by the victim in the criminal justice process.
These countries are requested to strengthen their systems for victim protection and supportand develop restorative justice policies, procedures and programmes at the same time.
Taking into consideration the various issues, we intend to clarify and analyze thecurrent situation and to explore more effective ways to protect victims of crime andencourage more active participation by the victim in the criminal justice process specificallyconsidering restorative justice approaches.
Giving due consideration to the above mentioned rationale, the Seminar intends to
explore more effective ways to protect victims of crime and encourage more active
participation by victims in the criminal justice process specifically considering restorative
justice approaches in each of the participating counties. By clarifying and analyzing theactual situation, possibilities and problems, sharing a theoretical basis, experiences andinformation, we will be able to find the most appropriate direction towards effective
protection of victims of crime and encourage active participation by the victim in the criminal
justice process specifically considering restorative justice approaches.
In the Seminar discussions, focus will be placed upon the following issues:
1. Current situation and problems in relation to the protection of victims of crime andthe active participation of victims in the criminal justice process:(a) Current situation and problems in relation to measures to protect victims of crime;(1) Swift victim restoration system without recourse to court procedure such as
mediation, reconciliation and arbitration, (2) Victims of crime compensation system, (3)Protection of victims and witnesses from offenders (tougher bail conditions, separationof waiting rooms between victims, witnesses and offenders, witness protection
programmes, prohibition of access by the offender to the victim), (4) Methods oftestimony in order to protect victims and witnesses (confidentiality of information about
victims and witnesses, video link, testimony using video tape, guardian ad litems andwitness attendants during testimony), (5) Various kinds of services for victims such as
immediate and direct support(b) Current situation and problems in relation to the active participation of victims in thecriminal justice process;(1) The right of complaint for the victim, (2) Private prosecution, (3) System/measures ofobjection to non-prosecution and dismissal of the case, (4) The hearing of victim
statements relevant to the release of offenders (release on bail, home leave, furlough,parole, release on expiration of term of sentence), (5) Victim impact statements and victim
impact evidence, (6) Recovery of loss/damage through the criminal justice process(compensation order, reparation order, community service order as a symbolic restitution,
reparation order as a condition of a probation order, reconciliation in the criminal process,incidental civil law suit to the trial)6(c) Current situation and problems in relation to providing information for victims ofcrime;(1) An information providing system for the victim at each stage of the criminal justicesystem (situation of investigation, arrest, prosecution/indictment, schedule of trial, locationof offender, result of fact finding, sentence, escape, release on bail, home leave, furlough,parole, release on expiration of term of sentence and death of offender), (2) Providing achance of attendance at the trial, (3) Providing offender’s information to the community(such as information of release from a correctional institution and residence in thecommunity of a sex offender)
2. Current situation, possibilities and problems in restorative justice approaches:(a) General topics of restorative justice - theoretical basis and problems of restorative
justice, relation between restorative justice and criminal justice(1) The aim and goal of restorative justice(2) The possibilities and problems of the restorative justice approach - protection of therights of the person concerned in the restorative justice process(i) The ways of ensuring impartial solutions in the restorative justice process(ii) Guarantee of due process of law for offenders in the restorative justice process(b) Particular topics of restorative justice - current situation, possibilities and problems ofthe management of systems based on restorative justice approaches;(1) Swift and effective restoration of loss caused by crime through the restorative
justice process (including recovery of damage)- active participation of the victim andcommunity in the victim offender reconciliation programme (VORP), victim offender
mediation programme (VOM), victim offender dialogue programme and family groupconferencing (FGC) process, (2) What are the conditions under which the restorative
justice approach as a diversion system functions most effectively (in terms of age,crime, criminal history and other important elements that affect effective
management), (3) The relationship between a restorative outcome (agreement basedon the restorative process) and the formal criminal procedure, (4) Effective measuresfor ensuring a restorative outcome (which is based on agreement through therestorative justice process)7

Seminar Summary
Lectures
In total, 10 lectures were presented by visiting experts and 4 by ad hoc lecturers. Fivedistinguished criminal justice practitioners from abroad served as UNAFEI visiting experts.
They lectured on issues relating to the main theme, and contributed significantly to the Seminarby encouraging discussions after their own lectures, participating in the discussions of otherprogrammes, and conversing with the participants on informal occasions. Additionally, ad hoc
lectures were delivered by distinguished senior officials of the Government of Japan. The
lecturers and lecture topics are listed on page 8.
Individual Presentations
During the first two weeks, each Japanese and overseas participant delivered a fortyfive minute and one-hour Individual Presentation respectively, which introduced the actual
situation, problems and future prospects of his/her country. These papers were compiled into abook entitled "COUNTRY REPORTS FOR THE INTERNATIONAL SEMINAR IN CRIMEPREVENTION" and distributed to all the participants. The titles of these Individual
Presentation papers are listed on pages 10 and 11.
General Discussion Sessions
General Discussion Sessions further examined the subtopics of the main theme. In
order to conduct each session effectively, the UNAFEI faculty selected individuals to serve as‘group members’ for the sub-topics, based on their response to a questionnaire previously
distributed. Selected participants served as chairpersons, co-chairpersons, rapporteurs or corapporteurs, and faculty members and visiting experts served as advisers. Each group’s
primary responsibility was to explore and develop their designated topics in the General
Discussion Sessions. The participants and UNAFEI faculty seriously studied the topics andexchanged their views based on information obtained through personal experience, theIndividual Presentations, lectures and so forth. After the General Discussion Sessions, reports
were drafted based on the discussions in the conference hall. These reports were
subsequently presented in the Report-Back Session. The General Discussion Papersummarized the vital points of each of the seven general discussion sessions. This General
Discussion Paper is printed on pages 12 through 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 of Japanesesociety and culture, with the assistance of various organizations and individuals, including the
Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF). For more detailed descriptions, please refer topages 17 through 20.

8Lecture Topics
UNAFEI Professors’ Lectures
1)

Mr. Toru Miura, Professor, UNAFEI· The Criminal Justice System in Japan: Investigation, Prosecution and Trial

2)

Mr. Kenji Teramura, Professor, UNAFEI• Institutional Corrections in Japan3)

Mr. Kei Someda, Professor, UNAFEI• Community-Based Treatment of Offenders in Japan

Visiting Experts' Lectures
1)

Professor John Braithwaite (Australia)· The Evolution of Restorative Justice· Restorative Justice: Theories and Worries

2)

Ms. Sylvia Frey (Germany)• Victim Protection in Criminal Proceedings: The Victim’s Rights to Information,
Participation and Protection in Criminal Proceedings·

3)

Victim Protection in Criminal Proceeding: Reparation for Damages

Dr. Kittipong Kittayarak (Thailand)• Restorative Justice: The Thai Experience· A Brief Outline of the Current Situationof the Protection of Victims of Crime in

Thailand4)

Mr. Peter Dunn (United Kingdom)· Victim Support in the UK: its History and Current Work· Victim Support in the UK: Victim Support Services in Detail95)

Ms. Kay M. Pranis (United States of America)· Restorative Justice in Minnesota and the USA: Development and Current Practice· Restorative Justice in Minnesota and the USA: Implementation and Outcomes

Ad Hoc Lectures
1)

Professor Takayuki Shiibashi
Faculty of Law, Chuo University, Japan• Situation of the Protection of Victims of Crime in Japan – From the Viewpoint of
Criminal Procedure and Comparative Study of Law

2)

3)

Professor Akira Yamagami
Department of Criminal Psychiatry, Division of Social Medicine and Dental University,
Japan• Victim Support in Japan
Mr. Koichi Tachikawa
Office for Crime Victims, National Police Agency, Japan· Police Support for Crime Victims: History and Overview

4)

Ms. Yukiko Yamada
Vice-President, Victim-Offender Dialogue Programme Management Center, Chiba, Japan
Current Situation and Challenges of the Victim-Offender Mediation ProgrammeManagement Center in Chiba Prefecture

10

Individual Presentation Topics
Overseas Participants
1)

Mr. A. K. M. Mahfuzul Haque (Bangladesh)• The Protection of Victims of Crime and the Active Participation of Victims in the Criminal
Justice Process in Bangladesh

2)

Mr. Tshering Penjore (Bhutan)• Country Report

3)

Mr. José Castro (Chile)• Victimization

4)

Mr. Ayman Amin Abdel Azeem Shash (Egypt)• Country Paper

5)

Mr. Fritz Gerard Dennery Martinez (El Salvador)• Country Report

6)

Mr. Pagar Butar Butar (Indonesia)• A Study of the Protection of Victims of Crime and their Participation in the Criminal Court
Process in Indonesia

7)

Mr. Sida Laukaphone (Laos)• Protection of Victims of Crime in Lao PDR

8)Mr. Joseph Bernard Dalinting (Malaysia)• Country Report

9)Mr. Kesab Prasad Bastola (Nepal)• Country Report

10)

Mr. Abdul Latif Khan (Pakistan)• Country Report

11)Mr. Malik Naveed Khan (Pakistan)• Country Report

12)

Mr. Sarei Noel (Papua New Guinea)• Country Report

13)

Mr. Globert Jabat Justalero (Philippines)• Country Report

14)

Ms. Angkana Boonsit (Thailand)• Victim Hearing in Criminal Justice in Thailand

11

15)

16)

Ms. Somsri Rhujittawiwat (Thailand)• Victims of Crime
Mr. Nabil Mokdad Daassi (Tunisia)
Crime Prevention in Tunisia·

Japanese Participants16)

Ms. Hitomi Akiyama (Japan)• Victim Protection in Prosecution

17)

Mr. Yasuo Kataoka (Japan)• Positive Participation of Criminal Victims in the Criminal Justice Process

18)

Mr. Hiroyuki Nabana (Japan)• Planning of Criminal Justice Facilities from the Viewpoint of Victims

19)

Mr. Masaharu Ozawa (Japan)• Penal Institutions in Japan and Crime Victims Issues

20)

Mr. Ikuro Toishi (Japan)• The Situation and Problems of Participation in the Criminal Justice Process by Crime
Victims Especially in Courtrooms

21)

Mr. Motoshige Yoshida (Japan)• The Current Status and Challenges of Systems for Protecting Crime Victims andEncouraging their Participation in Criminal and Legal Procedures

12

General Discussion Paper
The following section is the produce of the general discussions that were held during the
Seminar.
Introduction
The main theme of the 123rd International Senior Seminar which was held at theUnited Nations Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of
Offenders (UNAFEI) was “The Protection of Victims of Crime and the Active Participationof Victims in the Criminal Justice Process specifically considering Restorative JusticeApproaches.” During this seminar, we had seven general discussion sessions to identify andclarify problems and to find practical solutions and future prospects for various issues related
to the protection and support of victims of crime and restorative justice approaches with theactive participation of all participants, visiting experts from overseas and UNAFEI faculty
members.
The essential parts of the discussions were crystallized as the following selected
recommendations.
To implement the recommendations, the relevant agencies of the United Nations and
UNAFEI may provide necessary assistance.
PART I Support and Protection of Victims of Crime
There has been little attention paid to victims of crime in criminal justice systems until
recently and their main role has been limited merely to being “witnesses”. However, people
have acknowledged the importance of support and protection for victims because victims not
only face loss of life, physical injury, loss of property and various kinds of damage, but also
suffer emotional shock and stress as well as secondary victimization.
Under these circumstances, “The Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime andAbuse of Power” was adopted by the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of
Crime and the Treatment of Offenders in 1985. The Principles require nations and nationals
to have sympathy and respect for the victim.
Therefore, the following goals should be achieved in order to fully implement support
and protection for victims of crime.
a. To give victims due legal status and establish systems for supporting the interests ofvictims such as participation in criminal proceedings.
b. To provide immediate medical, material, social and psychological support tovictims suffering from post crime trauma.
c. To ensure that the institutions involved in the process of victim support do notmarginalize any segment of society.
d. To make all kinds of relevant information to victims available promptly and free ofcost.
e. To provide the necessary protective measures for victims/witnesses who areworried about offender’s retaliation in order to ensure their safety and realize

13justice.
Recommendations
1. In the countries from where the participants come, the areas of concern in victim support
are so wide and varied that in order to embark on a programme of such magnitude would
be too ambitious and the scant resource availability will be a serious impediment. As suchit is recommended that in each of the counties only those areas should initially be targetedwhich are of very high concern and carry serious sensitivity. These programmes could
then be gradually expanded to cover other areas as awareness amongst the public takes
place and resources are available.
2. With due consideration to each country’s context, we need to set up pilot projects forvictim support and assistance. These should include governmental and non-governmentalorganizations and involve the local communities. Balance, coordination, collaboration,and networking in service delivery among relevant agents would be the keys inaddressing individual needs of victims.
3. Since better development of victim support and assistance requires better understandingof victims, there is need to plan and conduct systematic training of facilitators. Experts
from countries with advanced victim support systems, e.g., the U.K., the U.S., etc. should
be invited with help from the donor countries for imparting training to trainers offacilitators. Services of locally available experts, e.g., psychiatrists and sociologists,should be utilized as well.
4. As the formal intervention tends to require a lot of resources, where appropriate, we may
utilize more informal support and assistance by communities. Traditional wisdom andcustoms should not be disregarded or disqualified since community development andmobilization may have potentialities to extend more appropriate services for victims ofcrime than institutionalized systems. In several developing countries, the informal social
support systems are very strong and dependable but may with time whither away without
being replaced by better or more effective ones. Therefore there is need to strengthen andformalize the traditional systems. Relying purely on borrowed concepts would prove
detrimental to the values propounded by the United Nations Declaration on the subject.
5. Basic information about criminal proceedings (such as arrest of offender, prosecution,schedule of trial, release on bail, sentence, escape and release of offender from custody or
correctional institutions) should be provided to victims by the competent authorities likethe police, public prosecutor, court or correctional institution through any such means thatare accessible to the victim i.e. letter, fax, email etc. Other information should be
provided upon request by an application of victims and decided by the police, publicprosecutor, the court, or correctional institution considering that disclosure of some
information could hinder criminal investigation and proceedings and violate the rights to
privacy of offenders and others, and have a negative impact on victims themselves andsociety.
6. The criminal justice system exists not only for punishing the criminals but also helping
the victims of crime. Every country recognizes that victims should be given theopportunity to play a more active role at every stage of criminal proceedings. In order topositively reflect victims' rights at trial, we recommend the introduction of "private

14

accessory prosecutions" if necessary, where the victims can participate in criminal trials
as private prosecutors in addition to public prosecutors. To what extent the victim canexercise their rights at trial should be discussed in respective countries based on their own
criminal justice systems.
7. Besides, in order to secure the victims' rights and prevent abuse of power and ensure
judicious use of discretion by public prosecutors, we have to establish adequate measuresor systems in cases where public prosecutors have decided not to prosecute the suspect.
Private prosecution is one thing, and a review system of non-prosecution cases is anotherthing. Every country where a private prosecution system is adopted has to pay meticulous
attention so that a victim should not be placed in a disadvantageous situation because ofpoverty and/or lack of legal expertise. In countries where private prosecutions are notavailable, there should be some appropriate measures to complain or appeal against thedecision of non-prosecution by public prosecutors. The decision of non-prosecution by
public prosecutors should be reviewed by other appropriate authorities in the countries
concerned. As characteristics of society and culture differ from country to country, we
have to carefully consider which system is suitable to be adopted in our respective
societies.
8. The police and other criminal justice related authorities should provide protective
measures to victims/witnesses in danger such as escort services, quick response to theircalls and necessary arrangements to hide them from offenders who threaten witnesses.
9. All countries are aware of the responsibility to protect victims from intimidation,harassment, retaliation and/or any harm by offenders, because victims are part of oursociety and justice cannot be realized without cooperation and participation of victims.
We should introduce some measures to protect victims such as providing separated
waiting rooms between offenders and victims/witnesses, and partitions in courtrooms.
Video link should also be introduced if the financial circumstances of respective countries
enable this.
PART II Restorative Justice Approaches
As victim protection and support gained ground, the restorative justice approach also
emerged as a new concept to tackle problems which the criminal justice system was failing toaddress. The restorative justice approach is one which considers the loss caused by crime
through the active participation of the victim, offender and the community.
“The Vienna Declaration on Crime and Justice: Meeting the Challenges of theTwenty-first Century” was adopted by the Tenth United Nations Congress on the Preventionof Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held in Vienna in April 2000. It encourages thedevelopment of restorative justice policies, procedures and programmes that are respectful of
the rights, needs and interests of victims, offenders, communities and all other parties. Basedon this Declaration, the working group of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal
Justice has drafted "Basic principles on the use of restorative justice programmes in criminal
matters" as a United Nations standard for restorative justice in 2002.
Although restorative justice has been defined in numerous ways, we reached a common
understanding about restorative justice from practical aspects as follows. Restorative justiceprovides a process with opportunities for victims, offenders and the community affected by a

15

specific offense and is a means to collectively identify and address harms, needs, and obligations,in order to heal and put things as right as possible.
We also identified the aims and goals of restorative justice as follows:(1) Healing victims of crime and all parties affected by a crime(2) Repair the harm caused by a crime(3) Reintegration of victims and offenders into the community(4) Asking an offender to be accountable(5) Deliberative democracy (decision making process)Based upon the above-mentioned definition, the aims and goals of restorative justiceand discussion on various issues related to the practical application of restorative justiceapproaches, we chose the following recommendations for the vital points of introducing andutilizing restorative justice approaches.
Recommendations
1. When each country initiates restorative justice approaches, pilot programmes whichcorrespond with problem-oriented approaches should be started, considering the feasibility
and efficacy of such approaches.
2. Each country should consider the following points in practicing restorative justiceapproaches:(1) The state should try to solve general problems such as ignorance and constraintsof resources when introducing restorative justice approaches.
(2) The state should ensure a fair process and outcome for the parties concerned in
restorative justice approaches.
(3) The state should take effective measures ensuring justice and ensure parties
have equal bargaining powers.
(4) The state should protect the human rights of offenders under the due process oflaw such as:(a) The right to equal protection under the law(b) The right to freedom from torture and cruel treatment(c) The right to be presumed innocent(d) The right to be tried by an impartial court(e) The right to assistance of legal counsel
3. Though the research so far conducted has proved that restorative justice approaches areuseful in prevention of re-offending, and provided results to the satisfaction of the parties
to a large extent, yet there is a need for more research on restorative justice approaches andpractices widening the scope particularly in the field of domestic violence.
4. Since restorative justice is a new concept, adequate information about restorative justice
should be provided not only to the general public but also persons working for the criminal
justice system in order to enhance awareness. Appropriate training should be given to
facilitators and the persons concerned with restorative justice approaches.
5. When the restorative justice process such as the victim offender reconciliation programme(VORP), victim offender mediation programme (VOM), victim offender dialogue

16

programme (VOD) and family group conferencing (FGC) are implemented, the following
guidelines should be observed in these programmes and conferences;
a. Participation should be voluntary.
b. Appropriate preparation should be done for each particular situation.
c. Trained facilitators and mediators should guide the process.
d. Appropriate follow-ups should be done to confirm the implementation of the agreement.
e. There should be feedback loops to determine the impact of the process of theparticipants.

17

Observation Visits
Date

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

Jan 22

Tokyo District Public
Prosecutors Office·

Jan 22

Ministry of Justice• Ms. Mayumi Moriyama
Minister of Justice

Jan 28

Tokyo Regional Immigration
Bureau• Mr. Masashi Shimazu
General Affairs Division

Feb 3

Sapporo Prison· Mr. Shinsuke Ota

Mr. Kunitaro Saida
Chief Prosecutor

Warden
Feb 3

Feb 10

Shimei Juvenile
School for Girls

Training

Fuchu Police Box· Mr. Toru Okochi

Superintendent· Mr. Yuichi Usui

Director
Feb 10Ome Toshiba Factory· Mr. Kensuke Adachi

Plant Manager
Feb 12

Supreme Court· Mr. Naoto Otani

Chief of Secretarial Section
Feb 12

Tokyo District Court· Mr. Osamu Ikeda

Deputy Chief Judge, Criminal Division

18Group Study Tour
Date

Group

Agency/Institution

Main Persons Concerned

Feb
2~4

Hokkaido• Sapporo Prison· Mr. Shinsuke Ota
Warden· Shimei Juvenile Training School for Girls· Mr. Toru Okochi
Superintendent

19

Special Events
January 14

Welcome Party

January 16, 17, 20, 21, 23 & 24
Japanese Conversation Classes
The overseas participants attended Japanese conversation classes provided by JICA.
They learned practical Japanese expressions. The Sensei (teachers) were Ms. Mieko Terao
and Ms. Setsuko Iwasaki.

January 16
Computer ClassA basic explanation of how to use a personal computer and how to access the internet
was given in the UNAFEI library by Professor Someda.
January 18
Tour of Tokyo
The participants were given a tour of the metropolitan area of Tokyo. They were able
to visit areas of Tokyo such as Akihabara and Asakusa.

January 22
Courtesy Visit to the Minister of Justice
Minister of Justice, Ms. Mayumi Moriyama greeted the participants during their visit
to the Ministry of Justice.
Reception Hosted by Vice-Minster of Justice
After visiting the Ministry of Justice, a reception was held by the Vice-Minister ofJustice, Mr. Keiichi Tadaki at the Lawyers Club, Tokyo.

January 25
Tour of Lake Kawaguchi
The participants enjoyed some time at Oshino hakkai (Oshino eight ponds park),
Narusawa Icicle Lava Cave and Oishi park where they were able to enjoy magnificent viewsof Mount Fuji over Lake Kawaguchi.
January 27

ACPF Nangoku-kai Party
The Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF) Nangoku-kai Branch, affiliatedwith ACPF Headquarters, hosted a dinner party in the Emerald Hall of the Hotel Pacific
Meridien Tokyo, Shinagawa, in honor of the participants.

January 29

Bowling Tournament
A Bowling Tournament was held in Fuchu for all of the participants. After the
Tournament the participants were able to enjoy a party at UNAFEI.

20

January 31

Public Lecture Programme
The Public Lecture Programme is conducted annually to increase social awarenessof criminal justice issues through comparative international study. The Programme,sponsored by the Asia Crime Prevention Foundation (ACPF), the Japan Criminal Policy
Society (JCPS) and UNAFEI, was held in the Grand Hall of the Ministry of Justice and wasattended by distinguished guests, UNAFEI alumni and the participants of the 123rd
International Seminar.
This year, Professor John Braithwaite (Chair, Regulatory Institutions Network
Research School of Social Science, the Australian National University) and Ms. Sylvia Frey
(Executive Assistant, Section on Criminal Procedure, Federal Ministry of Justice, Germany)
were invited as speakers to the Programme. They presented papers on, “Restorative Justice:
Justice of the Future” and “Victim’s Rights in Germany – Information and Participation in
Criminal Procedure, Reparation and Practical Assistance” respectively.

January 31
UNAFEI Alumni Reception
A reception was held to introduce the participants to UNAFEI Alumni residing inJapan, hosted by the UNAFEI Alumni Association at the Lawyers Club, Tokyo.

February 2~4

Hokkaido Study TourIn addition to the observation visits, the participants were able to enjoy trips
to the Sapporo TV Tower, the Sapporo Brewery and Lake Shikotsu where they observed
the Ice Statue Festival. On their final day in Sapporo, the participants visited Odori Park
where they enjoyed the Snow Festival. The ACPF Sapporo Branch also put on a party forthe participants on 3 February.

February 7
Koto Music Concert
The participants were treated to a performance from the Ensemble 21st Century where
the Koto (Japanese harp) and the Shakuhachi (vertical bamboo flute) were played.

February 8

Nabe (Japanese Hotpot) Party

A Nabe Party was held for the participants at UNAFEI for them to taste traditional
Japanese hotpot.
February 13

Farewell Party

21

Reference Materials Distributed
Victims of Crime
United Nations Declaration of Basic Principles of Justice for Victims of Crime and Abuse ofPower General Assembly resolution 40/34, 29 Nov. 1985
United Nations Vienna Declaration on Crime and Justice: Meeting the Challenges of theTwenty-first Century, Tenth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and theTreatment of Offenders Vienna, 10-17 April 2000
“The Rediscovery of Crime Victims and the Rise of Victimology”, Andrew Karmen,
CRIME VICTIMS (FOURTH EDITION), 2001
“Digging Up the Facts About Crime Victims” Andrew Karmen, CRIME VICTIMS(FOURTH EDITION) 2001
“Victims in the 21s t Century: Alternative Directions”, Andrew Karmen, CRIME VICTIMS(FOURTH EDITION) 2001
“Chapter 8 The Aftermath of Victimization Ⅰ：The Victimization Experience”, Leslie W.
Kennedy, & Vincent F. Sacco, CRIME VICTIMS IN CONTEXT
Office for Victims of Crime (U.S.A.), 2002, Chapter 14 First Response to Victims of Crime,
VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATION ESSENTIAL READINGS, Edited by David Shichor, T.S.
Tibbet and G. Stephen“Chapter 16 The Rights of Crime Victims. Does Legal Protection Make a Difference?” Dean
Kilpatrick, David Beatty, Howley and Susan Smith VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATIONESSENTIAL READINGS 2002
“Chapter 19 Stereotyping and Prejudice”, Emilio
VICTIMIZATION ESSENTIAL READINGS 2002

C.

Viano,VICTIMS

AND“Chapter 20 A Role for Victims in Offender Reentry”, Susan Herman & Cressida Wasserman,
VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATION ESSENTIAL READINGS 2002
“Chapter 15 From Pain to Power Crime Victims Take Action”, Lucy N. Friedman, Susan B.
Tucker & Peter Neville VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATION ESSENTIAL READINGS 2002
“Chapter 10 Summing Up”, Leslie W. Kennedy & Vincent F. Sacco, CRIME VICTIMS IN
CONTEXT“Chapter 21 A Preliminary Study of a Large Victim/Offender Reconciliation Program”, Mike
Niemeyer & David Shichor, VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATION ESSENTIAL READINGS
2002.

22

“6. Repaying Victims”, Andrew Karmen, CRIMEEDITION), WADSWORTH (THOMSON LEARNING, INC.)

VICTIMS(FOURTHBADISON LINKS AND RESOURCES VICTIM SUPPORT NATIONAL OFFICE Victim
SupportWorkingforVictimsofCrime.
Links
andResources;
http://www.bascapvss.org.uk/baslinks.htm , http://natiass003.unhost.uk.uu.net/about.htm“Victim Support Annual Review 2001”, VICTIM SUPPORT NATIONAL OFFICE“4. Victims and the Criminal Justice System : Cooperation and Conflict”, Andrew Karmen
CRIME VICTIMS (FOURTH EDITION), 2001
“Chapter 17:The Evolution of the Law of Victims Rights： Is There a Conflict with
Criminal Defendants’ Due Process Rights?”, Gregory P. Orvis, VICTIMS AND
VICTIMIZATION ESSENTIAL READINGS 2002 Edited by David Shichor, T.S. Tibbet
and G. Stephen“Chapter 18:The Effects of Victim Impact Statements on Sentencing Decisions -A Test in
Urban Setting”, Davis, Robert C. & Smith, Barbara E. VICTIMS AND VICTIMIZATIONESSENTIAL READINGS 2002, Edited by David Shichor, T.S. Tibbet and G. Stephen“Chapter 9: The Aftermath of Victimization Ⅱ: Victim Services, Courts, and Alternative
Justice”, Leslie W. Kennedy & Vincent F. Sacco, CRIME VICTIMS IN CONTEXT“Aim 3: To ensure the effective delivery of justice, avoiding unnecessary delay, throughefficient investigation, detection, prosecution and court procedures.To minimize the threat toand intimidation of witnesses and to engage with and support victims.” United Kingdom
Home Office, Home Page
Restorative Justice
Weitekamp, Elmar G.M. 1999 The History of Restrative Justice Restorative Juvenile
Justice: Repairing the Harm of Youth Crime
Economic and Social Council2002Basic principles on the use of restorative justiceprogrammes in criminal matters Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal JusticeEleventh SessionRestorative Justice org.2002UN Economic and Social Council Endorses Basic Principles on
Restorative Justice http://www.restorativejustice.org
The Little Book of Restorative Justice, Howard Zehr, 2002
“Restrative Justice: Assessing Optimistic and Pessimistic Accounts Crime and Justice, A
Review of Research, Volume 25”, John Braithwaite, 1999
“Crime, shame and reintegration” John Braithwaite, 1989
“Restrative Justice Is Republican Justice, Restorative Juvenile Justice: Repairing the Harm ofYouth Crime” John Braithwaite & Parker, Lode 1999

23

“Decomposing a Holistic Vision of Restorative Justice”, Contemporary Justice Review Special Issue Symposium on Restorative Justice Volume3, Number4, 2000, John Braithwaite“Restorative Justice and the Role of Community, Restorative Justice: International
Perspectives” Paul McCold,1996“Toward a Holistic Vision of Restorative Juvenile Justice: A Reply to the Maximalist Model”,
Contemporary Justice Review - Special Issue Symposium on Restorative Justice Volume3,
Number4, 2000 Paul McCold“How Pure Can a Maximalist Approach to Restorative Justice Remain? Or Can a Purist
Model of Restorative Justice Become Maximalist?” Contemporary Justice Review - Special
Issue Symposium on Restorative Justice Volume3, Number4, 2000 Lode Walgrave“Towards a Restorative Justice Future Restorative Justice: International Perspectives” Alan
Harland,1996“Legal Issues of Restrative Justice”, Restorative Juvenile Justice: Repairing the Harm ofYouth Crime 1999, Van Ness, Daniel Edited by W., Bazemore, Gordon & Walgrave, Lode
Restorative and Responsive Justice for the Whole of Law Presentation to the Quinnipiac-Yale
Dispute Resolution Workshop, New Haven 29 April, 2002 Braithwaite, John 2002
Leed Mediation and Reparation Service: Ten Yeas' Experience with Victim-OffenderMediation Restorative Justice: International Perspectives, Wynne, Jean, Edited by Galaway,
Burt & Hudson, Joe, 1996
Restorative Justice in New Zealand Japanese Journal of Sociological Criminology No.27,
Morris, Allison, 2002
Whither Restorative Justice in England and Wales? Restorative Justice: International
Perspectives, Galaway, Harding, John 1996, edited by Burt & Hudson, Joe
Prison-Based Victim-Offender Reconciliation Programs Restorative Justice: International
Perspectives Galaway, Immarigeon, edited by Russ, Burt & Hudson, Joe, 1996
Restorative Justice and Reoffending, Restorative Justice, Philosophy to practice, Maxwell,
Gabrielle & Morris, Allison, edited by Strang, Heather & Braithwaite John, 2000
Restorative Justice: An Evaluation of the Restorative Resolutions Project
http://www.sgc.gc.ca Solicitor General Canada Bonta, James & Rooney, Jennifer &Wallace-Capretta, Suzanne,1998
The Effectiveness of Restorative Justice Practices: A Meta-Analysis, Latimer, Jeff &Dowden, Craig & Muise, Danielle, 2001
Restorative Practices EFORUM Federal Probation Journal, Volume 66, No.1, Walker J.D.,
Lorenn, 2002

24

Restorative Justice Through Mediation: What We Are Learning From Research Japanese
Journal of Sociological Criminology No.27, Umbreit, Mark S. & Coates, Robert B. & Vos,
Betty, 2002
An Exploratory Evaluation of Restorative Justice Schemes
Series Paper 9, Miers, David & Maguire, Mike, et. al., 2001

Crime Prevention Research

An International Review of Restorative Justice Crime Prevention Research Series Paper 10,
Miers, David 2001
Recidivism Patterns in the Canberra Reintegrative Shaming Experiments (RISE), Sherman, L.
W., et al.2000
English Summary, Crime and Mediation, Selection of Cases, the Significance and Meaningof mediation to the participants, and reoffending, Mielityinen, Ida, 1999 Publication no.167,
pp.187-191.
Returning Justice to the Community, The Indianapolis Juvenile Restorative JusticeExperiment, McGarrell, E. F. et al.2000

25

EXPERTS & PARTICIPANTS LIST

Visiting Experts
Professor John Braithwaite

Chair, Regulatory Institutions Network Research
School of Social Science,
The Australian National University

Ms. Sylvia Frey

Executive Assistant,
Section on Criminal Procedure,
Federal Ministry of Justice,
Germany

Dr. Kittipong Kittayarak

Director General,
Department of Probation,
Ministry of Justice,
Thailand

Mr. Peter Dunn

Head of Research and Development,
Victim Support National Office,United Kingdom

Ms. Kay M. Pranis

Restorative Justice Planner,
Minnesota Department of Corrections,
United States of America

Overseas Participants
Mr. A. K. M. Mahfuzul Haque

Deputy Commissioner of Police,
Detective Branch,
Dhaka Metropolitan Police,
Bangladesh

Mr. Tshering Penjore

Superintendent of Police,
Royal Bhutan Police Division II,
Punakha, Bhutan

Mr. José Castro

Chief Prefect,
International Airport Control Dept.,
Director of Immigration and International Police
Department, Chile

Mr. Ayman Amin Abdel Azeem Shash

Chief Judge,
Esmallia Court,
Cairo, Egypt

26

Mr. Fritz Gerard Dennery Martinez

Police Chief,
Investigation Division for the West Region of
El Salvador

Mr. Pagar Butar Butar

Personal Staff of Director General of Corrections,
Ministry of Justice and Human Rights,
Jakarta, Indonesia

Mr. Sida Laukaphone

Director,
Law Research Centre,
Ministry of Justice,
Vientiane, Laos

Mr. Joseph Bernard Dalinting

Legal Officer/Prosecutor,
Head of Legal Division,
Forestry Department,
Malaysia

Mr. Kesab Prasad Bastola

Under Secretary (Law)
His Majesty’s Government,
Cabinet Secretariat,
Kathmandu, Nepal

Mr. Abdul Latif Khan

Deputy Inspector General of Police,
Mardan, Pakistan

Mr. Malik Naveed Khan

Director, Federal Investigation Agency,
Peshawar Zone,
Interior Division,
Ministry of Interior,
Pakistan

Mr. Sarei Noel

Rehabilitation Officer,
Correctional Service of Papua New Guinea

Mr. Globert Jabat Justalero

Prosecutor,
Office of the Provincial Prosecutor,
Iloilo City,
Philippines

Ms. Angkana Boonsit

Senior Probation Officer,
Research and System Development,
Department of Probation,
Ministry of Justice,
Bangkok, Thailand

27

Ms. Somsri Rhujittawiwat

Judge,The Court of Appeal Region 1,
Bangkok, Thailand

Mr. Nabil Mokdad Daassi

Superintendent Officer,
Social Prevention Department,
Judiciary Police Direction,
Tunis, Tunisia

Japanese Participants
Ms. Hitomi Akiyama

Prosecutor/Professor,
The First Training Department,
Research and Training Institute,
Ministry of Justice,Tokyo, JapanMr. Yasuo Kataoka

Public Prosecutor,
Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office,Japan

Mr. Hiroyuki Nabana

Technical Official,
Facilities Division,
Minister’s Secretariat,
Ministry of Justice,Tokyo, Japan

Mr. Masaharu Ozawa

Professor,
Training Institute for Correctional Personnel,
Fuchu, Japan

Mr. Ikuro Toishi

Judge/Professor,
Legal Training and Research Institute,Tokyo, Japan

Mr. Motoshige Yoshida

Chief of General Affairs Section,
General Secretariat,
Hokkaido Regional Parole Board,
Japan

28

FIFTH TRAINING COURSE ON CORRUPTIONCONTROL IN CRIMINAL JUSTICEThe Fifth Training Course on Corruption Control entitled, “Corruption Control in
Criminal Justice” was held from 28 October to 21 November 2002. In this course, thirteen
foreign officials and three Japanese officials engaged in corruption control comparatively
analyzed the current situation of corruption, methods of corruption prevention, and measures
to enhance international cooperation in this regard.
Participants
Mr. Fakhriyar Jabbarov

Chief Specialist,
International Legal Cooperation Department,
Ministry of Justice,
Azerbaijan

Ms. Nasreen Begum

Joint Secretary and Director,
National Legal Aid Services Organization,
Ministry of Law,
Justice and Parliamentary Affairs,
Bangladesh

Mr. Wang Gyeltshen

Government Prosecutor,
Office of Legal Affairs,
BhutanMr. Lomjaria Levan

Head of Division for International Treaties,
Ministry of Justice,Georgia

Mr. Amanbaev Anarkul

Senior Investigator,
Ministry of Internal Affairs,
KyrgyzMr. Sonesavanh Seng Aphay

Investigator,
The Office of Public Prosecutor,
Laos

Ms. Fariza Binti Hamzah

Deputy Public Prosecutor,
Legal and Prosecution Division of theAnti-Corruption Agency,
Malaysia

Mr. Mohamed Naeem

Judge,
Criminal Court, Male',
Maldives

29

Mr. Mansoor Qadir

Assistant Director,
Directorate of Anti-Corruption Establishment,
Punjab, Pakistan

Ms. Mirta Rika Miyasaki Miyamae

Attorney's Assistant,State Attorney General's Office,Paraguay

Ms. Alina Dorobant

Head of Public Law Division,
Department of Drafting Legislation,
Ministry of Justice,
Romania

Mr. Sakulyouth Horpibulsuk

Senior State Attorney,
Office of the Attorney General,
Thailand

Mr. Guerrero Cabrera Julio Cesar

Inspector,
Homicide Department,
Police Criminal of Venezuela,
Venezuela

Mr. Mitsuru Horiuchi

Judge,
Nagoya High Court,
Japan

Mr. Isao Shimamura

Public Prosecutor,
Yamagata District Public Prosecutors Office,
Sakata Branch,Japan

Mr. Masafumi Tsuji

Public Prosecutor,
Mito District Public Prosecutors Office,Tsuchiura Branch,Japan

General Discussion Paper
Introduction
The objective of this course is to analyze the current situation of corruption, to
explore the current problems related to corruption in the criminal justice system including at
the investigation, prosecution and trial stages, to explore the general measures in combating
corruption and to enhance international cooperation in fighting corruption.
Corruption threatens the rule of law, democracy, social and economic stability. It
undermines the public trust in the government and public administration. It is also awidespread phenomenon, which transcends all boundaries. It has now become a global

30

concern – a theme of everyday decision and debate. Therefore, there is a need to analyze thisproblem in its various aspects and to come up with an effective solution that will benefit all
parties involved in this training course.
Analysis of the Current Situation of Corruption
It has been revealed that corruption exists in every part of society, ranging from thepolitical level, corporate sector, administration, down to daily life. Corruption impedes the
economic situation of countries and has a direct impact on development and may discourage
foreign investments and foreign aid. Corruption in the judiciary has the power to cripple thedemocracy system of a country.
There are numerous causes of corruption, including the inefficiency of the legislative,
judiciary and executive system, and acceptance of corruption as being part of a society’s
culture and greed, in particular:· The economic situation with its various aspects: poverty, transition period,
globalization, uneven distribution of wealth, inadequate remuneration of public
officials;· The lack of education and inappropriate level of morality among public officials;· The lack of proper and efficient legislation in particular the need to establish a code of
conduct for public officials;· The lack of an efficient monitoring system;· The lack of public awareness on the danger of corruption and the acceptance ofcorruption as a culture;· The ineffectiveness of the criminal justice system and law enforcement agencies;· Abuse of power and political influence over the judiciary;· Abuse of power and excessive political influences over financial institutions andstate-owned companies.
General Measures for Prevention of Corruption· Effective and comprehensive anti-corruption policies and strategies and establishing anational forum comprising of all relevant authorities and agencies and representativeof the community;· Enhancing the transparency and accountability of the government;· Improving law and regulation fighting corruption and establishing efficient law
enforcement agencies, to enable effective investigation, prosecution and a fair trial;· Strengthening and maintaining the independence of the judiciary;· Strategies on improving economic and financial situations, focusing on giving
adequate salary for public officials;· The necessity to establish a code of conduct for public officials governing matterspertaining to conflicts of interest, abuse of power, an objective standard forrecruitment and promotion, training and education for public officials on the dangers
of corruption, scrutinizing the officials property, creating an obligation upon the
public officials to report corruption, promoting professionalism of the public service
and providing technical support facilities for investigators;

31· The need to have a check and balance system by establishing an internal and external
auditing system, independent ombudsman or any other similar bodies to streamline
the government procedures and procurement;· The necessity to increase public awareness on the evil of corruption through education
at all levels and encouraging the public to report corruption, using the mass media andinternet, supporting the involvement of NGOs;· Promoting and safeguarding human rights, especially the freedom of media as a tool
for maintaining democracy and ensuring checks and balances on each institution’s
power;
Problems relating to Legal Matters on Substantive Law and their Solutions
It has been agreed that the definition of “corruption” is to be left to the national
legislation. It has been agreed further that a proper enforcement of the law and proportionate
and efficient punishments for corruption offences are more important in combating
corruption. Furthermore, it is necessary to regulate appropriate statutes of limitation for all
corruption offences in the event that the national law of that country provides it.
Apart from that, it is also necessary to regulate corruption offences as predicate
offence for money laundering and to adopt specific legislation on confiscation of assets. The
relationship between corruption and organized crime has also been recognized and it isrecommended to increase the punishment for corruption committed by a criminal organizedgroup.
There is also a need for regulating laws for witness protection in order to encourage
the co-operation of the public with the authorities, including the possibilities of granting
immunity to offenders who cooperate with the authorities. Persons who report acts ofcorruption in good faith should be protected from undue negative consequences. The
necessity of criminalizing corruption in the private sector is universally recognized.
Problems relating to Investigation, Prosecution and Trial (Procedural Law) and their
Solutions
Cooperation between the investigators and prosecutors represent one of the mostimportant factors in an investigation of a corruption case. The need to establish an
independent agency or commission for fighting corruption depends on the situation of thecountry and public opinion and public awareness of such need. What is really important is tomaintain the professionalism, independence, integrity and credibility of the persons involvedin the investigation and prosecution.
Corruption is one of the most difficult crimes to investigate, therefore it is necessary
to give adequate and sufficient investigative powers to the investigators to facilitate smooth
investigations. There is also the need to improve the investigation methods and the need tohave a technical support system for investigators, for example undercover agents, intelligent
agencies, surveillance, interception of communications, etc.
It has also been recognized by all participants that there is a necessity to encourage
the public to report any corruption cases as it is often an offence committed in secret or of asecret nature and report centers should be established which operate 24 hours.

32

There should exist a check and balance mechanism between investigation andprosecution. There is also a need for common legal interpretations of the procedural laws by
the investigators, prosecutors and judges of their respective national laws. The procedures
involved need to be simplified in order to accommodate the investigation.
It is also
important to maintain the independence and the integrity of the court as being the last and themost important chain in the justice system.
International Cooperation
It is important first of all, to have a proper and efficient national legislation
recognizing the relevant offences on corruption, to have international bilateral agreements
and to participate in international forums, conventions and organizations, especially on
drafting the United Nations Convention Against Corruption.
There is a necessity to enhance international cooperation through exchange of
information, mutual legal and technical assistance, extradition, etc. Presently, tracing andconfiscating assets of corruption are the most debated issues at the international level,
therefore the participants expressed their opinion on this issue and reached a consensus on thenecessity to return the assets to the country of origin.
Conclusion
The effort taken by UNAFEI to organize this type of training course specializing in
corruption control in criminal justice is highly appreciated as being part of promotinginternational cooperation among the participating countries and the host country.
It has been agreed that to combat corruption effectively, there is a need to have proper
national legislation, efficient law enforcement agencies, and appropriate and comprehensive
policies from various aspects and focusing especially on creating public awareness on the evilof corruption. Apart from that, it is very important to have a positive, effective and strong
political will to make the eradication of corruption possible.
There is no single solution to combating corruption as it varies from one country toanother, according to the specific situation of that particular country, however, it is important
to share and exchange experiences, knowledge and best practices. International cooperation isindispensable to combat corruption and promote accountability, transparency and the rule oflaw.
We believe that the active participation on drafting the United Nations Convention
Against Corruption and the ratification of this international instrument will contribute toeffectively fighting corruption at the international level.

33

INDONESIA-UNAFEI JOINT SEMINARThe Indonesia-UNAFEI Joint Seminar was held in Jakarta on the theme of “Criminal
Justice Reform” from 18 December to 20 December 2002. The Government of the Republic ofIndonesia, JICA and UNAFEI organized the Seminar.
The Joint Seminar was attended by high-ranking Indonesian government officials,
representing all sectors of the criminal justice system as well as NGO members. The UNAFEI
delegation comprised of the Director, Deputy Director, three professors, the Linguistic Adviser,
two members of the secretariat and an officer from the National Police Agency of Japan.
The Joint Seminar considered the below-mentioned topics, subdivided into presentations
by UNAFEI and Indonesian participants. The participants heard presentations, reactions andopen forums on the following five topics:
Topic One

Effective Administration of the Police

Topic Two

Restoring the Integrity of the Criminal Justice System – Elimination of
Corruption in Criminal Justice

Topic Three Reform of the Legal Training System
Topic Four Judicial Reform
Topic Five

Reform of the Treatment of Offenders – Community Involvement

On the final day of the Joint Seminar, a draft of recommendations was drafted by theWorking Group. These recommendations were submitted to the final plenary meeting where
they were adopted in their entirety.
The final recommendations, as adopted by the Joint Seminar, were as follows:
1.

2.

3.

4.

As state agencies responsible for maintaining the rule of law, criminal justice agencies
should have guiding principles applicable to all. The main principles that should beincorporated within the system are: Fairness and Due Process of Law, the Principle ofLegality, Accountability, Transparency, Effectiveness and Efficiency, and Simplicity
and Expediency.
Coordination and cooperation among agencies must be promoted to ensure the justand expeditious administration of justice, thus avoiding the oft-cited conflicting
policies, which reduce the quality of the criminal justice system.
Sufficient attention should be given to protect the fundamental human rights ofpersons who fall under the criminal justice system by complying with international
instruments including the United Nations standards and norms.
As Indonesia is struggling towards a more professional and democratic criminal
justice system, each criminal justice agency (the police, the prosecutors office, thejudiciary and the correctional agency) should strive towards improving their

34

5.

6.

7.
8.
9.

10.
11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

16.

performances, especially in matters related to management, both human resources andoperation management.
The participation of the community must be ensured to enhance the performance ofthe criminal justice system in various ways. The formation of community-based
groups would be of great assistance not only for crime prevention-related activities,
but also for educating the public at large on criminal justice issues.
A strong framework should be established to guarantee the independence of the
judiciary.
Appropriate mechanisms should be established to ensure every judge is
not subject to undue influence, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct
or indirect.
Every effort should be made to make the courts more reliable, effective and accessible
so as to respond properly and speedily to the needs of society.
Access to information about justice including statutes and judicial precedents shouldbe actively promoted.
Recognizing the importance of securing competent criminal justice professionals,
such as judges, public prosecutors, practicing lawyers, police officers and so on:(i)Candidates to be legal professionals should be provided with broad andadequate legal education, at the under-graduate stage and beyond;(ii)
A fair and proper procedure for selecting, recruiting and appointing
legal professionals should be established;(iii) Legal professionals should be provided with continuing and on-the-job
training to improve their professional skill and knowledge in times of
rapid development in science and technology, and globalization;(iv)
To enhance the promotion of a “one roof” judicial system of education.
Investigation against, and prosecution of, corruption should be free from unduepolitical, economic and other improper influences.
An effective control mechanism is required for law enforcement agencies to promote
law and justice for the people. There should be an adequate number of professionals,
necessary resources and sufficient remuneration. An ethics mechanism including acode of conduct, strict internal and external controls should be established.
The proper and necessary equipment required to operate is imperative since much
misbehavior committed by criminal justice personnel is alleged to be a result of alack of facilities in the respective agencies.
The role of the legislature in promoting the work of the criminal justice systemshould be emphasized through its law-making process, where public participation isa necessity.
A trustworthy relationship between the police and the public is the basis of effective
police administration, especially of effective criminal investigation. So the police
should maintain the confidence of the public in various ways such as honestly
handling citizens’ requests, responding quickly to citizens’ complaints, providing
proper victim protection and support and so on.
Organized investigations and forensic investigations are essential to effective police
criminal investigations. To achieve this end, the police should establish an organizedinvestigation system and introduce various scientific techniques such as fingerprint
identification, DNA testing and so on.
To promote the reintegration of offenders into society, the enhancement of greatercommunity involvement in the management of corrections and probation services
should be encouraged.

35

17.

The conditions in correctional institutions and services accorded to inmates should be
improved to protect the basic human rights and to promote the rehabilitation of
offenders.

36

INFORMATION ABOUT PROGRAMMES & ACTIVITESForthcoming Programmes
1.

The 124th International Training Course

The 124th International Training Course, entitled “Effective Prevention andEnhancement of Treatment for Drug Abusers in the Criminal Justice Process”, is scheduled tobe held from 15 April to 15 June 2003. The 124th International Training Course will examine
the current situation of drug abuse, extract the current problems and challenges faced by eachjurisdiction and explore effective measures and strategies for further improving prevention andtreatment of drug abusers at every stage of the criminal justice process.
Rationale
Drug abuse is a global problem in our societies. Many serious problems derive fromsuch a global phenomenon. First of all, illicit drugs make significant profits forinternational organized criminal groups through such activities as illegal cultivation,
synthesization, and trafficking. They threaten the peaceful order and economic/politicalstability of our societies with increases in crimes, corruption, damages to various social
resources, etc. Also, in some countries, drug abusers are one of the major factors
contributing to overcrowding in prisons and other correctional facilities, which pressurize
the management and smooth operation of rehabilitative programmes. Moreover, drug
abuse and drug addiction increases the susceptibility to HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, and otherinfectious diseases, thereby damaging the health and welfare of a wide range of people
from adolescents to adults and impairs sound development among individuals, families,
and communities. Finally, numerous pieces of empirical research demonstrate that drug
abuse is one of the significant predictors for re-offending. From a practical point of view,
it is often the case that drug abusers commit various crimes in order to obtain money for
drugs or because they are under the influence of drugs. Therefore, drug abuse problems
have huge impacts on all the fields of the criminal justice administration from crime
prevention to treatment of drug offenders.
In view of the seriousness of drug-related problems, each country has taken specificmeasures in combating drug abuse problems. In addition, various international bodies andorganizations such as the G8 summit ad-hoc meeting of drug experts and the United
Nations have developed various countermeasures against drug abuse problems. At present,
there are the following three multilateral treaties adopted by the UN: Single Convention on
Narcotic Drugs (1961), Convention on Psychotropic Substances (1971), and the United
Nations Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances(1988). Through such international instruments, more effective measures such asenhanced control of illicit drugs including precursor chemicals, and international
cooperation in drug control, have been launched. In response to such movements, eachjurisdiction has made every effort to systematically implement suppressive measures for
drug trafficking and drug supply reduction policies by rearranging relevant domestic laws
and practices.

37

Meanwhile, in order to effectively cope with drug abuse problems, drug demand
reduction policies should be incorporated in comprehensive and well-balanced strategies
against drug abuse, in addition to control and reduction in the supply side. In thisconnection, the General Assembly of the UN at the 20th special session in 1998 recognizedthat drug demand reduction programmes should be one of the key elements of acomprehensive strategy combating drug abuse and trafficking, and adopted ‘theDeclaration on the Guiding Principles of Drug Demand Reduction.’ More specifically,paras.13-14 put emphasis on focusing on the special needs of clients in prevention andtreatment, and paras.15 and 17 encourage scientifically reliable information andevaluation:

13. Demand reduction programmes should be designed to address the needs of the populationin general, as well as those of specific population groups, paying special attention to youth.
Programmes should be effective, relevant and accessible to those groups most at risk, taking
into account differences in gender, culture and education.
14. In order to promote the social reintegration of drug-abusing offenders, where appropriate
and consistent with the national laws and policies of Member States, Governments should
consider providing, either as an alternative to conviction or punishment or in addition topunishment, that abusers of drugs should undergo treatment, education, aftercare,rehabilitation and social reintegration. Member States should develop within the criminal
justice system, where appropriate, capacities for assisting drug abusers with education,
treatment and rehabilitation services. In this overall context, close cooperation between
criminal justice, health and social systems is a necessity and should be encouraged.
15. Information utilized in educational and prevention programmes should be clear,scientifically accurate and reliable, culturally valid, timely and, where possible, tested with atarget population….
17. Demand reduction strategies and specific activities should be thoroughly evaluated toassess and improve their effectiveness. The evaluations should also be appropriate to thespecific culture and programme involved. The results of these evaluations should be sharedwith all those interested.

Thus, the early detection and prevention of drug abuse, and the appropriate delivery oftreatment and rehabilitative services addressed to individual risks and needs of drug
abusers are critical issues for drug demand reduction strategies, which should also be
scientifically reliable, valid, and effective. These are the main reasons to set up thistraining programme that explores ‘Effective Prevention and Enhancement of Treatment for
Drug Abusers in the Criminal Justice Process.’ More specific explanations are as follows:Firstly, the preventive strategies for drug abuse may be analyzed at multiple levels: i.e.,‘primary prevention’ which is directed at the general public population for enhancing
awareness, ‘secondary prevention’ which is directed at specific high-risk groups who haveincreased susceptibility for drug abuse, and ‘tertiary prevention’ which is directed at drug
abusers who could relapse into subsequent drug use. Moreover, effective preventive
strategies would require early detection and intervention for high-risk individuals as one of
the core elements. In this context, various practices have been accumulated by the policeand other criminal justice agencies.

38

On the other hand, with regard to the enhancement of treatment for drug abusers,
diversified intervention programmes have been utilized although specific measures taken
by each jurisdiction are characterized by differences in relevant determinants such as laws
related to drug offences, types of dominant drugs used in each country, etc. For instance,
programmes for drug abusers include detoxification, prescription of substitute drugs,
therapeutic community (TC) model approaches, psycho-social intervention by multidisciplinary teams, group counseling, boot camp treatment, relapse prevention programmes,
cognitive-behavioral skill trainings and a variety of support for smooth reintegration into
society. Moreover, if we examine responses at each stage of criminal justice system, somecountries have developed various diversion programmes at the police, prosecution, andcourt levels, in order to intensify alternatives for imprisonment and/or to conduct earlyintervention. Furthermore, in institutional settings, some countries utilize special
institutions or units for drug abusers, and/or provide intensive treatment programmes based
upon individual risks and needs of drug abusers. These experiences and practices in eachcountry might be re-examined in terms of such viewpoints as applicability, sustainability,
cost effectiveness, results of evaluative studies and Evidence-Based Practices (EBP).
Knowledge and experience in these practices can be accumulated as a useful knowledge
base, which may be reflected in further improving current practices and strategies oftreatment of drug abusers in each country.
On the basis of the explanations indicated above, the purpose of this International
Training Course is to offer participants opportunities to share information on the current
situation of drug abuse; punishments; prevention and treatment for drug abusers; andchallenges faced by each country. At the same time, this course offers opportunities to
explore more effective measures and strategies for preventing drug abuse and treating drug
abusers to promote their reintegration into society.
In summary, among the major topics to be discussed are the following items:(1) To examine and analyze the current situation of drug abuse; the legal framework of
prevention, punishment, and treatment for drug abusers; and practices andprogrammes for prevention and treatment.
(2) To extract current problems and challenges faced by each jurisdiction and theirpractices concerning prevention of drug abuse, punishment and treatment for drug
abusers.
(3) To explore effective measures and strategies for further improving prevention andtreatment of drug abusers at each stage of the criminal justice system based uponpromising practices and relevant empirical studies in each country.

2.

The 125th International Training Course

The theme of the 125th International Training Course is, as yet, undecided. It isscheduled to be held from 8 September to 31 October 2003.

39

3.
Eighth Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s
Republic of China
The Eighth Special Seminar for Senior Officials in criminal justice in the People’s
Republic of China, “International Cooperation in Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice – toFocus on the Implementation of the UN Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs
and Psychotropic Substances, 1988 and the UN Convention against Transnational Organized
Crime”, is scheduled to be held at UNAFEI from 24 February to 14 March 2003. Ten seniorcriminal justice officials and UNAFEI faculty will discuss contemporary problems faced by
China and Japan in relation to the above theme.

4.

Second Seminar on Judicial System for Tajikistan

The Second Seminar on Judicial System for Tajikistan will be held from 3 March until
21 March 2003 at UNAFEI. The objectives of this course will be to study the Tajikistan
criminal justice system from a comparative perspective, including an overview of the Japanesecriminal justice system and to study the current situation, problems and countermeasures inrespect of transnational crime.

Overseas Trips by Staff
Ms. Mikiko Kakihara (Professor) and Mr. Kenji Teramura (Professor) attended aninternational conference on “Offender Rehabilitation in the 21st Century” in Hong Kong as
speakers from 1 to 6 December 2002.
Mr. Kunihiko Sakai (Director) attended the Coordination Meeting of the United Nations
Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme Network in Turin, Italy from 3 to 10
December 2002.
Ms. Sue Takasu (Professor) gave a lecture at a symposium on “Preventing Organized
Crime” in Abu Dhabi, the United Arabs Emigrates, which was held by the Ministry of theInterior, UAE from 12 to 19 December 2002.
Ms. Mikiko Kakihara (Professor) visited the Philippines to conduct research into theissue of volunteer probation officers from 12 to 15 January 2003.
Mr. Kunihiko Sakai (Director), Ms. Tomoko Akane (Deputy Director), Mr. Toru Miura(Professor), Mr. Yuichiro Tachi (Professor) Mr. Kei Someda (Professor), Mr. Sean Eratt(Linguistic Adviser), Mr. Makoto Nakayama and Mr. Takahiro Ihara (Staff) represented
UNAFEI at the Indonesia-UNAFEI Joint Seminar on “Criminal Justice Reform” held from 18
to 20 December 2002 in Jakarta, Indonesia.
Mr. Toru Miura (Professor) visited Jakarta, Indonesia from 29 January to 5 February
2003 in order to conduct a survey of the needs for legal and judicial reform in Indonesia.

40

Mr. Yuichiro Tachi (Professor) and Mr. Yoshiyuki Fukushima attended the ICACInterpol Conference in Hong Kong from 21 to 25 January 2003.

UNAFEI Home Page: http://www.unafei.or.jp/
UNAFEI Email: unafei@moj.go.jp

41

STAFF & FACULTY OF UNAFEI
Faculty:
Mr. Kunihiko Sakai
Ms. Tomoko Akane
Mr. Toru Miura
Mr. Kenji Teramura
Mr. Kei Someda
Mr. Yuichiro Tachi
Mr. Yasuhiro Tanabe
Ms. Sue Takasu
Mr. Ryuji Kuwayama
Ms. Mikiko Kakihara
Mr. Sean Brian Eratt
Secretariat:
Mr. Kiyoshi Edura
Mr. Yoshiyuki Fukushima

Director
Deputy Director
Chief of Training Division, Professor
Chief of Research Division, Professor
Chief of Information & Library Service Division,
Professor, 123rd Course Programming Officer
Professor
Professor, 123rd Course Sub-Programming
Officer
Professor
Professor
Professor
Linguistic Adviser

Chief of Secretariat
Deputy Chief of Secretariat

General and Financial Affairs Section
Mr. Takahiro Ihara
Chief
Mr. Wataru Inoue
Mr. Tatsufumi Koyama
Ms. Chika Yamashita
Ms. Akiko Tsubouchi
Mr. Teruo Kanai
Maintenance
Mr. Noboru Kaneko
Maintenance
Mr. Shokichi Kai
DriverTraining and Hostel Management Affairs Section
Mr. Takuma Kai
Chief
Mr. Makoto Nakayama
Ms. Mayu Hayashi
123rd Course Assistant Programming Officer
Mr. Hiroyuki Koike
Ms. Shinobu Nagoaka
International Research Affairs Section
Mr. Masuo Tanaka
Chief
Librarian
Ms. Akiko Inoue

Secretarial Staff
Ms. Akiko Masaki
Ms. Kyoko Matsushita

42

Kitchen, Chef
Mr. Tomohiko Takagi

JICA Coordinator
Ms. Kiyomi Hoshino