CHAIR’S SUMMARY
Ninth Regional Seminar on Good Governancefor Southeast Asian Countries
Jakarta, Indonesia
24 – 26 November 2015

GENERAL
1. The Ninth Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries, co-hosted
by the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) of Indonesia, the Corruption Eradication
Commission (KPK) of Indonesia, and the United Nations Asia and Far East Institute for thePrevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI) was held at the JW Marriott
Hotel in Jakarta from 24 to 26 November 2015.
2. Officials and experts from the following jurisdictions attended the seminar: Brunei
Darussalam, the Kingdom of Cambodia, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, theRepublic of Indonesia, Japan, the Lao People’s Democratic Republic, Malaysia, the Union of
Myanmar, the Republic of the Philippines, the Kingdom of Thailand and the Socialist
Republic of Viet Nam. The main theme of the Seminar was Current Challenges and Best
Practices in the Investigation, Prosecution and Prevention of Corruption Cases—Sharing
Experiences and Learning from Actual Cases.

OPENING CEREMONY
3. Mr. Adnan Pandu Praja, Vice Commissioner of the KPK, Mrs. Laksmi Indriyah, Acting Headof the Legal and International Relations Bureau, AGO, and Mr. YAMASHITA Terutoshi,
Director of UNAFEI (by video message) delivered opening addresses, welcoming theparticipants and expressing the importance of informal information sharing and international
cooperation among practitioners in order to eradicate corruption.
4. Mr. HONSEI Kozo, Minister (Deputy Chief of Mission), Embassy of Japan in Indonesia,delivered a special address, welcoming the participants, noting that corruption is an obstacle
to good governance and democracy in all countries and stressing the need to counter
corruption by engaging the support of the public. Furthermore, Mr. HONSEI stressed that the
government of Japan stands ready to provide support to all Southeast Asian countries in theirfight against corruption.

KEYNOTE ADDRESSES
5. Mr. Adnan Pandu Praja, Vice Commissioner of the KPK, delivered his keynote address,
recognizing that although the participants come from different backgrounds, they share thesame desire to exchange information and practices on fighting corruption. Mr. Praja
explained that one of the corruption trends in Indonesia involves the budgeting process;public procurement is subject to corruption at the regional and central levels, and collusion
begins at an early stage. Thus, it is important that regulators are involved in oversight fromthe early stages of the budgeting process. In the field of asset tracing, Mr. Praja acknowledge
that the MLA process takes time, so it is important to improve cooperation throughinternational fora, such as this seminar and UNCAC’s implementation review process.
Combating corruption requires training and coordination between investigators, prosecutors
and judges. The KPK has played an active role in developing the Jakarta Principles andworking through SEA-PAC, APEC, and so on to further regional cooperation and to improve
international cooperation in anti-corruption enforcement. In closing, Mr. Praja reiterated theimportance of effective communication and information sharing to successfully combat
corruption.
6. Mr. Taro Morinaga, Deputy Director of UNAFEI, delivered his keynote address, reminding
the participants that the purpose of this seminar is to share experiences, information andpractices related to anti-corruption enforcement. One of the subtopics of this seminar ismutual legal assistance and asset recovery. Due to the transnational nature of corruption, it isimportant that practitioners feel as comfortable operating on the international level as they dooperating within their respective national jurisdictions. Deputy Director Morinaga, citing an
example of his experience in seeking legal assistance from the legal authorities in the
Bahamas, stated that the key to success in international cooperation is to keep an open mind,
to conduct the necessary research, and to know your counterpart in the cooperating
jurisdiction. The second subtopic of this seminar is public-private partnership, which isimportant not only for the detection, investigation and prosecution of corruption but also forprevention. If the authorities lose the public trust, they will become isolated from the public,
which will defeat their ability to conduct anti-corruption investigation and prosecution.
Deputy Director Morinaga noted the importance of the private sector in the prevention andprosecution of corruption, reminding the participants of an example of such cooperation
between the Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission and a Malaysian oil and gas company
involving Certified Integrity Officers.

VISITING EXPERT’S LECTURES
7. Mr. Tony Kwok Man-wai, Anti-Corruption Consultant and former Deputy Commissioner of
the Independent Commission Against Corruption, Hong Kong
Anti-Corruption Strategy: When corruption in a society is wide-spread, open and organized(i.e., syndicated), it is the most serious instance of corruption. The first task is to eliminate
syndicated and open type corruption, which is achievable with a strong team of investigators,
and should be achievable in a relatively short time (3 to 5 years). There is no single approach
to fighting corruption. Simply relying on an anti-corruption unit is insufficient, as isignoring petty corruption. Fighting corruption requires a comprehensive approach coupledwith a zero tolerance policy. The ICAC uses a three-pronged approach—deterrence,
prevention, and education—to fight corruption. In a country where corruption is widespread,enforcement should be the priority because it demonstrates the political will to eradicate
corruption. Prevention is important, but it must be supported by effective enforcement.
Public-Private Partnerships: Public-private partnerships are another important component ofanti-corruption strategy. All countries seek foreign direct investment, and Hong Kong usesthe ICAC to emphasize Hong Kong’s “level playing field” as a selling point for seeking
investment Hong Kong. Thus, governments should seek to form partnerships with private
sector groups, including the business community, professional bodies, educational intuitions
and the media. Mr. Kwok discussed a number of best practices for public-private partnership,such as the establishment of 24-hour public reporting hotlines; National Integrity Councils as
coalition bodies to create national anti-corruption action plans and monitor progress towards
anti-corruption goals; joint task forces, which support integrated approaches toanti-corruption investigation; and ethics development centres that partner with educational
institutions to promote business ethics. Mr. Kwok also proposed the adoption of Institutional
Integrity Action Plans by all sectors of society—government agencies, regulatory bodies andprivate institutions. The four pillars of such plans include ethical leadership, staff integrity,
systems integrity, and monitoring and deterrence. Key points of such plans include internalmonitoring systems, conflicts of interest policies, risk management, internal auditing, and soon.
Mutual Legal Assistance: Corruption is a transnational crime that is committed in secret.
Accordingly, international legal frameworks, such as UNCAC, and international cooperation
are increasingly necessary to facilitate extradition and MLA. Although practitioners arekeenly aware that the process is initiated by sending formal letters of request to thedesignated central authority, complications arise based on the substance, form and legal
posture of such requests. Problems include issues with dual criminality, reciprocity, refusals
to fulfill requests in cases of political offences or where the death penalty may be applied,bank secrecy, inability to compel witnesses, and so on. To overcome these problems,countries enter into mutual legal assistance treaties (MLATs) and should engage in informalinternational cooperation, which is extremely useful for handling routine requests,
identification of suspects or witness, and sharing information and intelligence. Joint seminars
such as this one for anti-corruption practitioners to enhance professionalism and networking
is critical to the success of such institutional cooperation measures.
Recovery of Proceeds of Corruption: Asset recovery requires close cooperation with financial
intelligence units (FIUs) to investigate and freeze assets, often applying a lower standard of
proof than that used in criminal courts. Because corruption typically occurs in secret, it isdifficult for investigators to find direct evidence of the crime. Asset tracing, however, iscomparatively easy because of the challenges facing criminals as they attempt to conceal theproceeds of their crimes. Effective asset tracing requires strong powers of investigation andpublic support. In the 1970s, Hong Kong developed the principle of excessive assets (illicit
enrichment), which criminalizes the possession of unexplained, disproportionate wealth bygovernment officials. Identifying these assets requires a strong legislative framework thatenables investigators to obtain information and freeze, seize, and confiscate illicit proceeds.
Asset tracing requires extensive investigation into family relationships, personal records,
financial records, travel movement, and so on to identify the relevant parties and transactions
that show how illicit proceeds have been concealed or spent. Next, overt action, i.e., searchand seizure, is necessary to obtain proof. Mr. Kwok used a case study to explain how
investigators in Hong Kong were able to trace the illicit assets of a corrupt police officer
based on the seizure of the officer’s tennis club membership card. Thus, any clue, no matter
how small, may be the key to asset tracing.

DISCUSSION SUMMARY
8. ANTI-CORRUPTION PRACTICES: ASSET RECOVERY AND INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
A. BRUNEI DARUSSALAM: The participants from Brunei introduced the case of Public
Prosecutor v. David Chong, in which Chong, as manager of Musfada Enterprises,
defrauded Brunei Shell Petroleum of over US$5 million, attempted to hide illicit proceeds
overseas and absconded to another jurisdiction. Chong was the first case in which
non-conviction based (NCB) confiscation was used pursuant to Section 83 of Brunei’s
Criminal Asset Recovery Order (CARO). The case is a successful example of mutual
legal assistance through both formal and informal channels. The broad scope ofinternational cooperation involved the granting and execution of a warrant of arrest byauthorities in Malaysia and the freezing of bank accounts, the execution of a confiscation
order and the repatriation of funds from Singapore to Brunei.
B. CAMBODIA: The participants stressed the importance of mutual legal assistance to combat
corruption and emphasized that informal cooperation between law enforcement should be
utilized to strengthen ties among ASEAN countries, which have already concluded amultilateral treaty on mutual assistance (ASEAN Treaty on Mutual Legal Assistance in
Criminal Matters (2004) (the “ASEAN Treaty”). In addition, it was noted that for prompt
recovery of proceeds of corruption it is essential to expand the use of bi- and multilateralagreements. When a person is found guilty of corruption, the court orders the confiscationof all proceeds of corruption—whether or not the property has been transmitted intoanother form—as well as any benefits or other advantages related to the property.
C. INDONESIA: The participant from the KPK reported that the KPK has been involved witha number of successful cases of international cooperation. The KPK stressed theimportance of communication in the MLA process, particularly making use of bothinformal and formal MLA requests. At an early stage and throughout the process, the
KPK establishes contact with the legal attaché at the requested country’s embassy inJakarta, the foreign investigator, and Indonesia’s FIU, and so on. The participant from the
AGO reported that corruption is still a significant barrier to social and economic
development in Indonesia. It was reported that Indonesia still takes a criminal punishment
approach to corruption cases, which does not sufficiently focus on asset tracing andrecovery. The AGO’s Asset Recovery Center is designed as a special unit to handle asset
recovery throughout all stages of the investigation from the beginning of the investigation
through execution. The AGO is well positioned to manage asset recovery because of its
extensive network of provincial, district and sub-district offices throughout Indonesia andits role as the nation’s primary justice agency.
D. LAOS: Corruption remains pervasive throughout society, ranging from high-ranking
officials to private enterprises, traffic police, and even the field of education. The
Huaphan Province case, involving the embezzlement of $1.25 million by nine
government officials over the course of at least five years, demonstrates the extensive andsystematic scope of corruption. Although anti-corruption legislation exists,
implementation is not effective. Coordination between the State Inspection Authorities atthe central and provincial levels is weak; few corruption cases reach court, and manycases are resolved through disciplinary measures. To root out corruption in the central
government, the Prime Minister established the Anti-Corruption Investigation Department
in July 2015. Laos engages in mutual legal assistance and other forms of international
cooperation, including asset recovery, primarily on the basis of international law andbilateral agreements, to the extent that doing so comports with Lao law.
E. MALAYSIA: The participants from Malaysia presented a case study of the Perwaja case,which raised the practical issue of the admissibility of evidence obtained through mutual
legal assistance. The depositions of six key witnesses were obtained from Hong Kong;
however, the witnesses refused to testify in Malaysia. Therefore, the prosecution wasforced to rely on the deposition transcripts, which were objected to by the defence
counsel. The legal dispute, involving a conflict of legal interpretation of the Evidence Act
and the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Act of 2002, was ultimately resolved infavour of the defendant by Malaysia’s highest court. However, the Evidence Act has beensubsequently amended. Now, pursuant to section 90D of the amended Evidence Act,MACMA and the Evidence Act can be read harmoniously. However, the new provisions
have not yet been tested. The MLA process takes too long, usually three to six months
just to draft a request. It may take about a year to obtain responses to MLA requests.
Under Malaysian law, the criminal case must proceed within three months, meaning thatthe delays in the execution of requests are the greatest obstacles to successfulprosecutions in Malaysia.
F. MYANMAR: The participants from Myanmar explained the country’s anti-corruption
enforcement mechanisms and MLA procedures, noting that Myanmar is a party to the
ASEAN Treaty and UNCAC. With the assistance of the UNODC, Myanmar promulgatedthe Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Law 2004, and the law has been
approved by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF). The Anti-Corruption Commission is
responsible for enquiries into bribery and illicit enrichment cases, and it is also
responsible for the prosecution of corruption cases. The Commission establishes
Investigation Boards led by a commissioner of the Anti-Corruption Commission andother appropriate persons, and Preliminary Scrutiny Boards composed of appropriate
citizens, to conduct the investigations. Myanmar faces the challenge of suspects
absconding during investigations, so the laws and rules that address this challenge need tobe amended. When corruption cases are filed with the court, the burden of proof lies withthe prosecution, following the principles of the English common law and according to the
Evidence Act.
G. PHILIPPINES: In the Philippines, the Office of the Chief State Counsel is responsible for
accepting treaty-based MLA requests. An example of a treaty to which the Philippines is aparty is the ASEAN Treaty signed on the 29th day of November 2004. In the absence of atreaty, the Anti-Money Laundering Council (the “Council”), which is the FIU of thePhilippines, may execute requests for assistance from foreign jurisdictions. To detect
illicit assets, Sworn Statements of Assets, Liabilities and Net Worth (SALNs) must be
submitted by public officers or employees on an annual basis. SALNs provide
investigators with simple and practical tools to analyse increases in assets and detect
unexplained wealth. Once discovered, the government may freeze, seize and confiscateproceeds of corruption.
H. THAILAND: Thailand explained its formal and informal procedures for mutual legal
assistance. Informal requests are primarily for the purpose of obtaining information andare responded to by the NACC. Formal requests can be treaty based or non-treaty based,
and the requirements for such requests are regulated by the Act on Mutual Legal
Assistance in Criminal Matters, B.E. 2535 (1992) (the “MLA Act”). Thailand also
provides assistance based on 14 bilateral MLATS and the ASEAN Treaty. The MLA Act
permits freezing or seizing of assets and confiscation. An embezzlement case wasintroduced, in which the laundered money was returned from Switzerland, the United
Kingdom and Guernsey Island to Thailand through the execution of a civil judgement. It
was also reported that Thailand is trying to amend the MLA Act to introduce
non-conviction-based confiscation, and to provide for the return of confiscated assets tovictims or the requesting state; the draft law is being considered by the parliament.
I. VIET NAM: The participants from Viet Nam reviewed the corruption offences stipulated in
the Penal Code, such as bribery, embezzlement, abuse of power and so on, and stated thatpunishment for such offences ranges from definite terms of imprisonment to life
imprisonment and the death penalty. Emphasizing the importance of asset recovery, it wasreported that the total estimated damages caused to Vietnamese society from 2010 to 2013
amounted to US$795 million, of which 29.4% thereof was recovered. Some of thechallenges facing enforcement in Viet Nam were highlighted by the Duong Chi Dungcase, in which the US$5 million criminal judgement against him has not yet been
executed. To overcome the numerous challenges, Viet Nam might consider: (1) improving
the legislative framework for asset recovery and expanding the role of the prosecution in
financial investigation and freezing procedures, (2) using financial experts to evaluate theactual values of proceeds of crime; (3) improving the financial knowledge of law
enforcement officers; and (4) enhancing international judicial cooperation. Viet Nam also
explained the procedure of mutual legal assistance, including the contents of letters ofrequest. Because Viet Nam cannot directly execute a foreign order to freeze, seize or
confiscate proceeds of crime, letters of request should request that the Vietnamese
authorities either execute the foreign order or that they freeze, seize or confiscate theproceeds under Vietnamese law.
9. ANTI-CORRUPTION PRACTICES: PUBLIC–PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS
A. CAMBODIA: Cambodia provided good examples of a framework for public–private
partnership to prevent and detect corruption cases, including the establishment of theGovernment–Private Sector Forum, concluding MOUs with the private sector, providing
public reporting mechanisms and whistleblower protection, and other accomplishments,
which have brought Cambodia significant progress in combating corruption.
B. LAOS: Investigators rely on the support of the public to identify corruption.
Anti-corruption investigators conduct regular monitoring of and request recommendations
from citizens about the performance of government officials and civil servants.
Furthermore, all citizens, institutions and organizations are required to participate in theprevention and countering of corruption by providing timely cooperation to authorities.
C. MALAYSIA: “Corporate Integrity Pledges”, entered into between the Malaysia
Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) and businesses, establish a framework forcooperative anti-corruption efforts. The programme encourages the private sector topromote good governance and transparency, to strengthen compliance and internalmonitoring systems, and so on. Companies agree to create anti-corruption action plans,establish committees for corporate governance and training, and audit and reportperformance. Also, the MACC’s Certified Integrity Officer (CeIO) programme provides
training to senior officers in government and the private sector to create an integrity-based
work culture throughout Malaysia.
D. MYANMAR: Corruption cannot be eradicated by the government alone, and Myanmar
recognizes that the active participation and support of the public is necessary to combat
corruption. Accordingly, public reporting mechanisms, public awareness campaigns, andwhistleblower protections and rewards (Anti-Corruption Law, Sec. 17(i)) have been
established. Prevention is a key component of Myanmar’s anti-corruption strategy, andseminars conducted with the support of international organizations are key measures forraising and disseminating awareness.
E. PHILIPPINES: The Philippines presented its robust use of multi-sector partnerships tocombat corruption. For example, the SHINE Project is an integrity initiative thatencourages all business executives to sign integrity pledges and encourages employees toengage in proper business practices. The SHINE Project has among others, establishedthe “Proactive Hotline” service to encourage reporting of conflicts of interest and otherinstances of corruption involving the private sector. The Office of the Ombudsman as thecentral anti-corruption agency of the Philippine Government also engages the private
sector, for example, by reaching out to schools through the Campus Integrity Crusadersforum and the Integrity Caravan. The Philippines also has established whistleblower
protections to obtain the support of the public in the fight against corruption. The Estrada
Plunder and Pork Barrel Scam cases demonstrate the importance of public participation inanti-corruption enforcement. In the Estrada case, 76 witnesses testified for theprosecution after being granted whistleblower protection and immunity in exchange for
their testimony. Whistleblower protection and immunity are necessary tools to secure
the support of the public through their testimony and provision of other evidence
necessary for conviction. Similarly, the Pork Barrel Scam case, which involves theembezzlement of public funds by Filipino senators, is particularly notable in that the scam
was initially exposed by the investigative reporting of the media—an important institutionthat serves, and forms a part of, the public.
F. THAILAND: Thailand engages in public-private partnerships through programmes
established by the NACC. For example, Thailand introduced the “True Friend Project”,
under which the NACC has appointed 760 participants from Thai provinces, encouraging
them to promote activities to raise public awareness. Also, the NACC has partnered with
the Thai Bank Association to educate high school and university students on good
governance. The NACC issues “Corporate Governance Awards”, through which the
NACC recognizes outstanding private-sector organizations for their transparency andaccountability.
G. VIET NAM: Although the traditional Vietnamese conception of corruption focuses on the
public sector—as does Viet Nam’s legislation—the importance of the partnershipapproach is increasingly recognized in Viet Nam, as evidenced by the fact that the
National Assembly is now considering to amend the Penal Code so that private sector
corruption would be officially recognized.

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

10. LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. International Cooperation
To successfully investigate and prosecute of corruption cases, it is essential to have close
relationships among related international agencies. All countries have frameworks forinternational assistance, but in order to utilize these frameworks, informal informationexchanges among related agencies are crucial.
B. Asset Recovery
Asset recovery is extremely important so that illicit proceeds do not remain in the handsof criminals. During this seminar, it was reported that few cases of international asset
recovery have been successfully resolved, but a successful case was reported by Brunei.
In order to improve the effectiveness of asset recovery, anti-corruption practitioners
should: (1) improve domestic legislation, (2) establish closer relationships withcounterparts in other jurisdictions, and (3) improve specialized knowledge in the field offinance among investigators and prosecutors.
C. Public–Private PartnershipTo effectively detect and prevent corruption, the relationship with the private sector,
including corporations and the general public, is very important. In this seminar,
Corporate Integrity Pledges and Certified Integrity Officers were discussed as bestpractices in Malaysia. In many countries, effective and innovative efforts have been madein the field of public–private partnership, for example, integrity initiatives in thePhilippines, the “True Friends Project” in Thailand and legislative measures and reform in
Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Viet Nam. It was also suggested that anti-corruption
agencies should take the legitimate interests of the private sector into account, particularly
with respect to the confiscation of the proceeds of corruption. Failure to do so is likely toalienate the private sector and create obstacles to public-private partnership.

26 NOVEMBER 2015
JAKARTA, INDONESIA