GROUP 3

STRENGTHENING THE CAPACITY AND ABILITY
OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE AUTHORITIES AND THEIR PERSONNEL
Chairperson
Co-Chairperson
Rapporteur
Co-Rapporteur
Members
Advisers

Mr. Yasunobu Hishita
Mr. Hassan Gashemi
Mr. Joselito D.R. Obejas
Mr. Vladimir Georgiev
Mr. Mardite Harlan
Ms. Clelia Fabiana Akizawa
Ms. Mihoko AsoProf. Tetsuya SuganoProf. Jun Oshino
Prof. Koji Yamada(Japan)(Iran)(Philippines)(FYR Macedonia)(Indonesia)(Argentina)(Japan)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)(UNAFEI)

I. INTRODUCTION
The group convened at the Director’s House on 28 January 2008. The group chose, by consensus, Mr.
Hishita as Chairman, Mr. Ghasemi as Co-chairman, Mr. Obejas as Rapporteur, and Mr. Georgiev as Corapporteur.
The group was tasked with discussing the topic of “Strengthening the capacity and ability of the criminal
justice authorities and their personnel” with the following guiding points or agenda: (1) Ensuring thenecessary independence of the criminal justice authorities; (2) Integrity of the personnel of the criminal
justice authorities; (3) Transparency and accountability in the relevant decisions in criminal proceedings; and(4) Specialization of the criminal justice authorities.

II. SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSIONS
A. Ensuring the Necessary Independence of the Criminal Justice Authorities
The discussion of this item started and terminated on the first day the group convened. Before thecommencement of the discussion, it was agreed that the criminal justice authorities in each country to which
the discussion shall pertain are limited to the law enforcement agencies, the public prosecutors and thecourts only.
During the discussion, it was disclosed that the independence of the criminal justice authorities in Japanis generally observed and respected.
In some of the participating countries in the group, the independence of the criminal justice authorities
suffers to some extent because of the necessity of political patronage in their appointment, selection,promotion and assignment and/or due to occasional interference in their work or the exertion of influence byother government functionaries within or outside of the criminal justice system.
So that full independence of the criminal justice authorities in the affected countries can be attained, thegroup suggests that each of the said countries must sincerely endeavour to pass, adopt and enforce relevant
legislation that shall clearly define the functional divisions of the three branches of government andstringently observe and put into force constitutional provisions on their independence from each other. The
approval of the proposed budget of the criminal justice authorities must always be guaranteed or secured.

B. Integrity of the Personnel of the Criminal Justice Authorities
While the participants from Japan consider the personnel in their criminal justice system, in general, topossess an appreciable degree of integrity, the participants from the other countries disclosed that theintegrity of the criminal justice authorities in their respective countries is most often compromised by: (1)low pay or remuneration; (2) the cultural values of family groups, cronyism, getting along, extending
sympathy on another’s misery, and eternally paying a ‘debt of gratitude’; and (3) the need to obtain political139

RESOURCE MATERIAL SERIES No.77

backing in their appointment/selection or promotion.
To address this matter, the group recommends the following;(1) The upgrading of the remuneration of the criminal justice authorities and their personnel, making it
more decent and competitive;(2) The passage and implementation of appropriate measures that will further underscore andstrengthen codes of conduct and ethical standards in the public service;(3) The creation by law of a permanent and independent multi-sectoral body that will regularly conduct a
performance evaluation or audit of the civil service personnel but whose functions will not necessarily
prejudice the independence of the criminal justice authorities;(4) The ratification of, and full compliance with, the UNCAC by each of the countries concerned, it
containing measures guaranteeing the integrity of the judiciary and the prosecution service; and(5) The adoption and observance of the pertinent UN guidelines and resolutions regarding theindependence and integrity of judges and prosecutors, particularly the “Guidelines on the Role ofProsecutors” and the “Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct”.

C. Transparency and Accountability in the Relevant Decisions in Criminal Proceedings
The participants gladly revealed that the relevant decisions of their judicial authorities are generallytransparent for they are readily made known not only to the parties involved but to the public as well, andthat their judicial authorities can always be held accountable for their decisions, either administratively,civilly or criminally. However, in some countries there is less transparency in the investigation proceedings
and in the decisions of prosecutors.
The participants in the group agreed that the ratification, adoption and full implementation of the UNCAC
may be a very appropriate action to broaden public access to the anti-corruption bodies, as provided in thesaid Convention.
Moreover, insofar as the accountability of the law-enforcement agencies and the prosecutors in theirdecisions is concerned, an internal audit system, like the one presently adopted and implemented by theICAC of Hong Kong, must be considered.

D. Specialization of the Criminal Justice Authorities
Among the countries represented in the group, only the Philippines and Indonesia have special anti-graftcourts. Nevertheless, all the countries in the group, except Iran, have special law-enforcement units andprosecution offices that are tasked with investigating and prosecuting corruption cases.
Since it is the consensus of the participants that it is more beneficial for a particular country to havespecialized criminal justice authorities, it is, therefore, suggested that the creation of such special anti-graftbodies in the countries concerned be considered. Furthermore, the ratification and adoption of, and fullcompliance with, the UNCAC is desirable as it contains provisions on specialized authorities.

140