MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI(1 January 2008 - 31 December 2008)
I. ROLE AND MANDATE
The Asia and Far East Institute for the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders (UNAFEI)
was established in Tokyo, Japan in 1961 pursuant to an agreement between the United Nations and theGovernment of Japan. Its goal is to contribute to sound social development in Asia and the Pacific region bypromoting regional co-operation in the field of crime prevention and criminal justice, through training andresearch.
UNAFEI has paid utmost attention to the priority themes identified by the Commission on Crime
Prevention and Criminal Justice. Moreover, UNAFEI has been taking up urgent, contemporary problems in
the administration of criminal justice in the region, especially problems generated by rapid socio-economicchange (e.g., transnational organized crime, corruption, economic and computer crime and the reintegrationof prisoners into society) as the main themes and topics for its training courses, seminars and research
projects.

II. TRAINING
Training is the principal area and priority of the Institute’s work programmes. In the international
training courses and seminars, participants from different areas of criminal justice discuss and studypressing problems of criminal justice administration from various perspectives. They deepen theirunderstanding, with the help of lectures and advice by the UNAFEI faculty, visiting experts and ad hoc
lecturers. This so-called “problem-solving through an integrated approach” is one of the chief characteristics
of UNAFEI programmes.
Each year, UNAFEI conducts two international training courses (six weeks’ duration) and one
international seminar (five weeks’ duration). One hundred and forty nine government officials fromvarious overseas countries receive fellowships from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA; an
independent administrative institution for ODA programmes) each year to participate in all UNAFEI training
programmes.
Training courses and seminars are attended by both overseas and Japanese participants. Overseas
participants come not only from the Asia-Pacific region but also from the Middle and Near East, Latin
America and Africa. These participants are experienced practitioners and administrators holding relatively
senior positions in criminal justice fields.
During its 47 years of existence, UNAFEI has conducted a total of 140 international training courses
and seminars, in which approximately 3,394 criminal justice personnel have participated, representing 117
different countries. UNAFEI has also conducted a number of other specialized courses, both country andsubject focused, in which hundreds of other participants from many countries have been involved. In theirrespective countries, UNAFEI alumni have been playing leading roles and holding important posts in thefields of crime prevention and the treatment of offenders, and in related organizations.

A. The 138th International Senior Seminar
1. Introduction
The 138th International Senior Seminar was held from 17 January to 15 February 2008. The main theme
was “Effective Legal and Practical Measures for Combating Corruption: A Criminal Justice Response”. In
this Seminar, fifteen overseas participants and six Japanese participants attended.
2. Methodology
Firstly, the Seminar participants respectively introduced the current position regarding the role andfunction of criminal justice agencies in their country in regard to the main theme. The participants werethen divided into three group workshops as follows:3

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008

Group 1: Identifying and Punishing Corrupt Offenders
Group 2: Confiscation of Illegal Benefits and Asset Recovery
Group 3: Strengthening the Capacity and Ability of Criminal Justice Authorities and their Personnel
Each Group elected a chairperson, co-chairperson(s), a rapporteur and co-rapporteur(s) in order tofacilitate the discussions. During group discussion the group members studied the designated topics andexchanged views based on information obtained through personal experience, the Individual Presentations,lectures and so forth. Later, Plenary Meetings were held to discuss the interim outline of the Group
Workshop reports and to offer suggestions and comments. During the final Plenary Meetings, drafts of
the Group Workshop reports were examined and critiqued by all the participants and the UNAFEI faculty.
Based on these discussions, the Groups further refined their reports and presented them in the ReportBack Sessions, where they were endorsed as the Reports of the Seminar. The full texts of these reports are
published in UNAFEI Resource Material Series No 77.
3. Outcome Summary(i) Identifying and Punishing Corrupt Offenders
The Group addressed the above matter by dividing the subject into three subsections: Firstly, measures
to encourage persons or bodies with useful information on corruption to pass that information on to anticorruption authorities, investigative and prosecutorial; secondly, proactive measures to collect informationon corruption and/or evidence; and thirdly, international co-operation. The Group emphasized the potentialof the media and education to create and sustain public support for anti-corruption measures. The Groupalso stressed that to achieve transparency, it is very important that anti-corruption authorities have accessto the declarations of assets made by public servants and high-ranking officials. This is the case in all of
the countries represented in the Group. On the matter of international co-operation, the Group limited its
discussions to the issues of obtaining evidence and information of bank accounts in foreign jurisdictions.
The following recommendations were made:1.

The States Parties to the UNCAC should express their will to prevent corruption by investing in
educational programmes and publicity campaigns to illustrate the damaging effects of corruption;

2.

States should encourage the reporting of offences through various measures such as witness
protection, where financially viable; whistle-blower protection; dedicated hotlines; plea bargaining
or immunity in certain cases; and obliging public servants to report any knowledge of corrupt acts ofwhich they become aware in the course of their duties;

3.

Traditional investigative techniques such as obtaining information from media, other cases andinformants; search and seizure; clearing bank secrecy and surveillance and expert reporting should
be enhanced;

4.

Special techniques such as undercover agents, wire-tapping, and electronic surveillance should beenhanced;

5.

Transparency should be strengthened by the appointment of an Ombudsman; the participation ofcivil society; obliging all public servants to declare their assets and income; and further obliging
public servants to provide requested information in investigations;6.

All countries should ratify the UNCAC and adopt the necessary legal instruments to provide
international co-operation;

7.

The value of informal, direct contact between criminal justice professionals cannot be overstated andshould be strengthened and continually encouraged.

(ii) Confiscation of Illegal Benefits and Asset Recovery
The Group discussed the above topic with reference to the following agenda: 1) identifying and tracing
crime proceeds; 2) seizure, freezing and confiscation; 3) international co-operation in identifying, tracing,4

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI

seizing, freezing and confiscating the proceeds of corruption; 4) asset recovery; and 5) other related matterssuch as money laundering.
Regarding the identification and tracing of crime proceeds, a majority of participants agreed thatinvestigation agencies need access to the bank accounts and bank records of suspects as well as
government, business and corporate records. It was also the general consensus that such agencies shouldhave access to information on the bank loans and mortgaged properties of the suspect. Collaborating withexperts and maintaining a close relationship with FIUs is important in acquiring reports of suspicioustransactions. Regarding seizure, freezing and confiscation, the group acknowledged that it can be difficult toprove beyond a reasonable doubt the link between the criminal action and the property of a suspect, and that
therefore civil proceedings could be considered in conjunction with criminal proceedings, as provided by thelaws of the respective countries. With regard to the third point, international co-operation, the Group agreed,inter alia , that the UNCAC provides an effective mechanism for such co-operation and as such its ratification
should be encouraged by all countries. With regard to the final agenda item, asset recovery, the Group feltthat countries must put in place legal frameworks which enhance international co-operation pertaining
to asset recovery and emphasized the importance of mutual legal assistance, supplemented by informal
contact.
The following recommendations were made:1.

The Group underlined the need for adequate legal and practical measures to gather evidence incorruption cases;

2.

Investigators must foster credibility to earn the co-operation of banks and other agencies;

3.

Expert help should be requested in deciphering complex transactions;

4.

Countries may consider using NGOs to help and assist law enforcement agencies for the above
purpose;5.

Whistle-blowers should be adequately protected;

6.

Without compromising human rights, countries should implement legal measures for the search,
seizure, freezing and confiscation of assets;

7.

Investigators should receive continuous training in collecting evidence linking the proceeds of crime;

8.

Confiscating assets of an equivalent value should be considered where it is not feasible to confiscate
crime proceeds;

9.

Ratification of the UNCAC should be encouraged as it provides for international co-operation on
identification, tracing, freezing, seizing and confiscation of proceeds of corruption;

10. MLA should be maximized in order to enhance bilateral international co-operation;
11. MLATs and legislation shall provide for the repatriation of criminal proceeds to the requesting state
and the requested state may deduct expenses incurred in the recovery of same;
12. MLAT procedures for bilateral co-operation should be simplified, allowing direct contact between
central authorities of the respective countries;
13. The Group emphasized the need for informal contact between law enforcement agencies ininternational co-operation. For effective assistance, countries may allow teams of prosecutors orinvestigators to travel to requesting countries;
14. Impediments to asset recovery are identified as inter alia , absences of appropriate legal frameworks,
disparity of systems internationally, lack of technical expertise and insufficient financial resources.
Proper frameworks are a necessary first step to addressing these problems. By implementing the5

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008

measures envisaged in the UNCAC and maximizing MLA supplemented informal contacts countries
can enhance the level of international co-operation which they can provide.

(iii) Strengthening the Capacity and Ability of Criminal Justice Authorities and their Personnel
The Group considered the above topic with regard to the following agenda: 1) ensuring the necessary
independence of the criminal justice authorities; 2) integrity of the personnel of the criminal justiceauthorities; 3) transparency and accountability in the relevant decisions in criminal proceedings; and4) specialization of the criminal justice authorities.
With regard to the first agenda item, the Group suggests that countries in which the criminal justiceauthorities are not fully independent must endeavour to pass, adopt and enforce relevant legislation thatshall clearly define the functional divisions of the three branches of government and stringently observe andput into force constitutional provisions on their independence.
Regarding the second agenda item, the integrity of criminal justice personnel, the Group made thefollowing recommendations:
1.

Increasing remuneration of criminal justice personnel in line with private sector salaries;2.

Measures to underscore and strengthen conduct and ethical standards in public service;3.

The creation by law of a permanent and independent multi-sectoral body that will regularly evaluate
and audit performances of public servants, without prejudice to the independence of criminal justiceauthorities;

4.

Ratification of and full compliance with the UNCAC by all countries concerned, it containing
measures guaranteeing the integrity of the judiciary and the prosecution service;

5.

Countries should adopt and observe pertinent UN guidelines and resolutions, particularly the
Guidelines on the Role of Prosecutors and the Bangalore Principles of Judicial Conduct.

The Group further noted that, regarding the third agenda item, accountability of law enforcement officials
and prosecutors in their decision making, an internal audit system, like the one presently employed by the
ICAC of Honk Kong, must be considered.
Finally, regarding the fourth agenda item, the Group agreed by consensus that it is preferable for acountry to have specialized criminal justice authorities, and to that end, it is suggested that the creation of
special anti-graft bodies be considered. The ratification of and full compliance with the UNCAC is desirable
in this regard as it contains provisions on specialized authorities.

B. The 139th International Training Course
1. Introduction
The 139th International Training Course was held from 19 May to 27 June 2008. The main theme was“Profiles and Effective Treatments of Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders”. In this Course, sixteen
overseas participants and eight Japanese participants attended.
2. Methodology
The objectives of the Course were primarily realized through the Individual Presentations and Group
Workshop sessions. In the former, each participant presented the actual situation, problems and future
prospects of his or her country with respect to the main theme of the Course. The Group Workshops further
examined the subtopics of the main theme. To facilitate discussion, the participants were divided into threegroups to discuss the following topics under the guidance of faculty advisers:
Group 1: Issues and Methods of Criminal Investigation, Prosecution and Judicial Procedures for Serious
and Violent Juvenile Offenders
Group 2: Effective Institutional Treatment Programmes for Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders

6

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI

Group 3: Effective Community Treatment Programmes for Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders
The three Groups elected a chairperson, co-chairperson(s), rapporteur and co-rapporteur(s) to organize
the discussions. The Group members studied the designated subtopics and exchanged their views basedon information obtained through personal experience, the Individual Presentations, lectures and so forth.
During the course, Plenary Meetings were held to discuss the interim outline of the Group Workshop
reports and to offer suggestions and comments. During the final Plenary Meeting the drafts of the Group
Workshop reports were examined and critiqued by all the participants and the UNAFEI faculty. Basedon these discussions, the Groups further refined their reports and presented them in the Report-Back
Sessions, where they were endorsed as the reports of the Course. The full texts of the reports are publishedin full in this edition of the UNAFEI Resource Material Series.
3. Outcome Summary(i) Issues and Methods of Criminal Investigation, Prosecution and Judicial Procedures for Serious andViolent Juvenile Offenders
The Group divided its discussion of the theme into two distinct areas: 1) investigation; and 2) the
judicial system. Each area was further sub-divided, allowing the Group to focus on the various stages ofinvestigation and court proceedings, and drawing on the professional expertise of the Group members.
Particular consideration was paid to the best methods of interviewing and assessing juveniles, deciding on
the necessity of detention, and the preservation of familial privacy and relationships.
Regarding investigation procedure, the following recommendations were made:1.

Juvenile offenders should be interviewed in a segregated place, separated from other juveniles,
witnesses, or the victim;

2.

It is desirable that criminal justice officials who deal with juveniles be specially trained;

3.

Whether or not the juvenile’s parents may be present should be decided in the best interests of thejuvenile and the best interests of the investigation;

4.

Bearing in mind the different needs and practices in each country, the period of detention should be
as short as possible;

5.

The decision to detain a juvenile must balance the protection of society and the protection of thejuvenile;

6.

With due regard to the gravity of the alleged crime, the decision should reflect the authority’s
concern for the juvenile;

7.

Behavioural and psychological analysis should be integral elements of the investigation;

8.

The privacy of the juvenile, his or her family, as well as the integrity of the investigation, should beprotected;

9.

A complete report of the investigation should be forwarded to the relevant authority.

Regarding judicial procedure, the Group made the following recommendations:
10. Rehabilitation and re-socialization should be the goal of juvenile justice;
11. The role and duties of parents are important, as is the family as an institution;
12. As each juvenile is an individual, the final deposition of the case should be based on a comprehensivesocial inquiry and psychological report;
13. The privacy of the juvenile and his or her family should be carefully protected;

7

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008

14. Victims should, at least, have the opportunity to voice their concerns in court;
15. Detention should be for the minimum period sufficient to rehabilitate the juvenile.

(ii) Effective Institutional Treatment Programmes for Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders
The Group carefully considered the theme according to the following agenda: 1) problems and challenges
of assessment techniques; 2) effective treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders;
3) treatment programmes which consider the victim’s views; 4) problems and challenges of continuous
treatment programmes from institutional care to community treatment; and 5) goals and needs to improve
effective institutional treatment programmes for serious and violent juvenile offenders.
In considering each item of the agenda the Group made careful comparisons of the current systemsof each participating country and identified five common challenges: 1) an absence of clear classification
regulations; 2) the lack of physical infrastructure and financial resources; 3) an insufficient number of
institutional programmes which consider the views of victims; 4) a lack of systematic follow-up programmes;and 5) inadequate information-sharing between institutional and community treatment authorities. Having
carefully considered the situation and practices in each participating country, the Group agreed upon thefollowing recommendations:
1.

The group underlined the necessity of identifying the risk of reoffending and the needs of thetargeted juvenile;2.

Juveniles should also be assessed for mental disorders, maturity and level of intellect;

3.

Levels of offending behaviour should be categorized to connect assessment and treatment;

4.

Assessment should be conducted by specialists in a range of disciplines;

5.

Standardized assessment tools which are adaptive to different situations and combine both
qualitative and quantitative methods should be introduced;

6.

Assessment methods should be properly selected and implemented;

7.

Governments should allocate the necessary human and financial resources to juvenile justice;8.

The minimum essential number of institutions should be constructed;

9.

Existing resources should be utilized to the best extent possible;

10. All approaches should be culturally and socially sensitive;
11. The juvenile justice system should encompass the needs of the juvenile and the concerns of thevictim, and should be administered by qualified personnel in a consistent manner;
12. Consideration should be given to systems of restorative justice to redress the harm that has been
done to victims;
13. Development of programmes which integrate institutional and community-based treatment isrecommended;
14. An organization with responsibility for both institutional and community-based treatment isdesirable;
15. Sharing information between related agencies should be facilitated by the development of electronic
data network systems;
16. At an early stage of the period of incarceration, interventions which prepare the juvenile for releaseshould be applied.

8

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI(iii) Effective Community Treatment Programmes for Serious and Violent Juvenile Offenders
The Group considered the above theme for juveniles who received non-custodial sentences as well as
those released from institutions. The Group was also tasked with addressing the problems and challenges
of continuous treatment programmes, including assessing the achievement levels of same; the relationships
between criminal institutions, government agencies, and NGOs; and crime prevention strategies such as
screening in early childhood and treatment for high-risk children. The Group emphasized the importanceof community-based treatment in the prevention of crime and highlighted the importance of community
support in this endeavour.
The following recommendations were made:1.

Every country should introduce non-custodial sentences and aftercare services for juveniles
released from institutions;

2.

Professionals in each country should seek political support for community-based treatment systems
through the introduction of statistically proven research;3.

A network of NGOs, community groups and businesses should be established, with the dual aim ofcreating financial support for rehabilitation activities and employment opportunities for rehabilitatedoffenders;4.

Public awareness of the work of probation offices and social workers should be increased to ensurethat sufficient numbers of competent staff are recruited;5.

Extensive training should be provided for all officers, especially those who deal directly with juvenile
offenders or children in conflict with the law;

6.

The establishment of halfway houses, whether government run or supported by civil society,would ease the problems of overcrowding, which hampers treatment programmes currently being
implemented;

7.

Family-oriented policies should be implemented to create strong families which can support young
people;8.

An inter-agency committee which develops consistent treatment programmes, co-ordinates
treatment and, with due respect for privacy, distributes information amongst social welfare services,
correctional institutions and probation personnel, would aid the implementation of successfultreatment programmes;

9.

Juveniles should be individually analysed for risk and need levels and programmes should be tailoredaccordingly;

10. Vocational training should be relevant to the current jobs market to increase employment
opportunities;
11. Benchmarking should be utilized to develop common assessment tools and gauge establishedpractices and programmes in different institutions;
12. High-risk families should be assisted by early intervention programming to assist in cultivating
healthy family relationships.

C. The 140th International Training Course
1. Introduction
The 140th International Training Course was held from 1 September to 10 October 2008. The main
theme was “The Criminal Justice Response to Cybercrime”. Ten overseas participants, two overseas
counsellors, and five Japanese participants attended.

9

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008

2. Methodology
The participants of the 140th Course endeavoured to explore the investigation, prosecution and trial of
cybercrime. This was accomplished primarily through a comparative analysis of the current situation andthe problems encountered. The participants’ in-depth discussions enabled them to put forth effective andpractical solutions.
The objectives were primarily realized through the Individual Presentations and the Group Workshop
sessions. In the former, each participant presented the actual situation, problems and future prospects of hisor her country with respect to the main theme of the Course. To facilitate discussions, the participants weredivided into two groups as follows:
Group 1: Issues and Measures Concerning the Legal Framework to Combat CybercrimeGroup 2: Challenges and Best Practices in Cybercrime Investigation
Each Group elected a chairperson, co-chairperson, rapporteur and co-rapporteur(s) to organize thediscussions. The Group members studied the situation in each of their countries and exchanged their views
based on information obtained through personal experience, the Individual Presentations, lectures and soforth.
Plenary Meetings were later held to discuss the interim outline of the Group Workshop reports and tooffer suggestions and comments. During the Plenary Meetings, drafts of the Group Workshop reports were
examined and critiqued by all the participants and the UNAFEI faculty. Based on these discussions, theGroups further refined their reports and presented them in the Report-Back Sessions, where they wereendorsed as the reports of the Course. The reports will be published in full in UNAFEI Resource Material
Series No. 79.
3. Outcome Summary(i) Issues and Measures Concerning the Legal Framework to Combat Cybercrime
The Group discussed the above topic according to the following agenda: 1) issues and measuresaccording to the criminalization of cybercrime; 2) legal issues related to the procedural law related tocybercrime, including the admissibility of digital evidence; and 3) challenges in combating trans-bordercybercrime, including issues of jurisdiction and international co-operation. The Group reached the following
conclusions:

10

1.

The Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime can be a good reference for minimum standards
that may need to be adopted by the participating countries, and some basic rules regarding collection
and admissibility of evidence from foreign jurisdictions are necessary;

2.

Investigative and judicial mechanisms of international co-operation must be improved; adequate
procedural laws may be implemented to assure the preservation of evidence when requested;3.

With regard to international co-operation, training and technical aid should be available to law
enforcement officials and others;

4.

Amendment of Article 2 of the Convention on Cybercrime to properly address the issue of data
espionage should be considered;5.

Diffusion of unsolicited emails should be suppressed;

6.

The general principles of substantive law of the respective countries may be taken into account inmatters such as illegal gambling, etc. committed in cyberspace;

7.

Private online communication should be protected as a civil right; investigative interception of sameshould be subject to judicial review;

8.

While remote investigation is sometimes the only available option to investigators, it is acontroversial issue and should be the subject of in-depth analysis;

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI

9.

National legislatures should consider a mandatory 180 day retention period of Internet traffic data;

10. Measures to record the identity of users of public terminals are desirable;
11. There should be no mandatory disclosure of encryption keys and passwords;
12. The principle of “passive personality” ought to be considered for addition to the Convention on
Cybercrime;
13. There was majority but not unanimous agreement on the importance of strengthening co-operation
between local offices of transnational service providers and national authorities in order to identify
nationals who use remotely located services to commit crimes.

(ii) Challenges and Best Practices in Cybercrime Investigation
The Group discussed the above topic according to the following agenda: 1) initial information gathering
and undercover online investigations; 2) tracing and identifying criminals; 3) digital forensic analysis
of evidence; 4) cross-border investigative abilities; and 5) international co-operation in cybercrime
investigation.
The Group made the following recommendations:1.

Improve initial information gathering by: (i) educating the public about cybercrime; (ii) improving
communication with victims, and training officers in report making; and (iii) increasing cyber-patrol
facilities;

2.

Undercover online investigations should be improved;

3.

Data retention by ISPs and telecoms providers should be enforced and available to criminal justiceofficials in conducting an investigation;

4.

Resources must be devoted to capacity building of specialized units;

5.

It is advisable to follow the recommendations of the International Review of Criminal Policy (No. 43& 44) - United Nations Manual on the Prevention and Control of Computer-related Crime (1994),
art. 198-209;

6.

In each country, a main cybercrime unit should assist smaller units in technically demanding
investigations;7.

A regular, formal training course on dealing with digital evidence, and not restricted to specialists,should be established;

8.

Training activities should be included in international co-operation programmes and efforts;

9.

A properly equipped Computer Emergency Team (CERT) is essential for responding promptly tocyber threats, and government and the private sector should co-operate closely on the operation ofsuch teams;

10. In addressing cross-border investigations, the following are suggested: (i) requests for evidence
be made under existing MLAT, MLA or Letter Rogatory procedures; (ii) 24/7 points of contact beutilized; (iii) embassies be utilized; (iv) networks of foreign counterparts be utilized;
11. General recommendations regarding international co-operation include: (i) implementing 24/7
points of contact; (ii) sharing information through regional organizations; (iii) co-operation inlegal, operational and technical dimensions; (iv) legal frameworks allowing engagement and joint
investigation with foreign countries; (v) using the diplomatic channel to contact other countries’
private sector entities or ISPs.

11

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008

D. Special Seminars and Courses
1. The Fourth Seminar on Criminal Justice for Central Asia
The Fourth Seminar on Criminal Justice for Central Asia was held from 25 February to 14 March 2008.
The main theme was “Countermeasures for Drug Offences and Related Crimes and Treatment for Drug
Abusers in the Criminal Justice Process”. Fourteen criminal justice officials from Central Asian countries(Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan) attended.
2. The 13th Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s Republic of China
The 13th Special Seminar for Senior Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s Republic of China was heldfrom 3 to 19 March 2008. The main theme was “Reform of the Criminal Justice System: Introducing theViews of Crime Victims and Improving Offender Treatment, Taking into Account the Risks and Needs andNeeds of Offenders”. Nine participants and two course counsellors attended.
3. The Third Country Specific Training Course on the Revitalization of the PPA Volunteer Probation Aide
System for the Philippines
The Third Country Specific Training Course on the Revitalization of the PPA Volunteer Probation Aide
System for the Philippines was held from 15 to 25 April 2008. Nine Parole and Probation Officers andthree Volunteer Probation Aides from the Philippines discussed measures to improve communication andfeedback, and measures to promote Volunteer Probation Aide Associations.
4. The Eleventh International Training Course on the Criminal Justice Response to Corruption
The Eleventh International Training Course on Corruption Control in Criminal Justice was held from16 October to 14 November 2008. In this Course, 15 overseas participants, four Japanese participants, andfive Thai observers, all of whom were officials engaged in corruption control, comparatively analysed thecurrent situation of corruption, methods of combating corruption, and measures to enhance international
co-operation.
5. The Ninth Training Course on the Juvenile Delinquent Treatment System for Kenya
The Eighth Training Course on the Juvenile Delinquent Treatment System for Kenya was held from 5 to
27 November 2008. Four policy-makers and eight senior practitioners from Kenya reviewed their progressin regard to improving the treatment of juveniles in correctional institutions and in the community and theprogress they have made in establishing a Volunteer Children’s Officers programme. The policy-makers
attended from 5 to 14 November, while the practitioners stayed from 5 to 27 November.
6. The Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries
The Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries, jointly hosted by
UNAFEI, the Office of the Attorney General of Thailand and the UNODC Regional Centre, Bangkok washeld from 23 to 25 July 2008 in Bangkok, Thailand. The main theme was “Corruption Control in Public
Procurement”. Approximately 25 participants from seven countries, comprising judges, prosecutors andother law enforcement officials, attended.

III. TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION
A. Regional Training Programmes
1. Short-Term Experts in Kenya
Two UNAFEI professors were dispatched to Kenya, from 26 July to 5 September 2008, to assist in theenhancement of the activities of the Department of Children’s Services, Ministry of Gender, Children andSocial Development.
2. Short-Term Experts in Latin America
Two UNAFEI faculty members visited Costa Rica and Argentina from 16 to 30 August 2008. In Costa
Rica, they jointly hosted, with ILANUD, a course on Criminal Justice Reform in Latin America in which
six countries were represented. They also held a follow-up seminar in Argentina, focusing on the specificsituation in that country.
3. Short-Term Experts in the Philippines
A UNAFEI professor was dispatched from 17 to 26 November 2008 to the Philippines, to participate as

12

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEIa short-term expert in the In-Country Training Programme for the Enhancement of the Volunter Probation
Aide System.

B. Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries
UNAFEI, the Office of the Attorney General of Thailand and the UNODC Regional Centre for East Asiaand the Pacific held the Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries in
Bangkok, Thailand from 23 to 25 July 2008. Approximately 25 participants from seven countries attended
the Seminar. The main theme of the Seminar was “Corruption Control in Public Procurement”.
IV. INFORMATION AND DOCUMENTATION SERVICES
The Institute continues to collect data and other resource materials on crime trends, crime prevention
strategies and the treatment of offenders from Asia, the Pacific, Africa, Europe and the Americas, andmakes use of this information in its training courses and seminars. The Information and Library Serviceof the Institute has been providing, upon request, materials and information to United Nations agencies,
governmental organizations, research institutes and researchers, both domestic and foreign.

V. PUBLICATIONS
Reports on training courses and seminars are published regularly by the Institute. Since 1971, theInstitute has issued the Resource Material Series, which contains contributions by the faculty members,
visiting experts and participants of UNAFEI courses and seminars. In 2008, the 74th, 75th and 76th editionsof the Resource Material Series were published. Additionally, issues 125 to 127 (from the 138th Seminar to
the 140th Course respectively) of the UNAFEI Newsletter were published, which included a brief report oneach course and seminar and other timely information. These publications are also available on UNAFEI’s
web site http://www.unafei.or.jp/english.

VI. OTHER ACTIVITIES
A. Public Lecture Programme
On 1 February 2008, the Public Lecture Programme was conducted in the Grand Conference Hall of
the Ministry of Justice. In attendance were many distinguished guests, UNAFEI alumni and the 138th
International Senior Seminar participants. This Programme was jointly sponsored by the Asia Crime
Prevention Foundation (ACPF), the Japan Criminal Policy Society (JCPS) and UNAFEI.
Public Lecture Programmes increase the public’s awareness of criminal justice issues, throughcomparative international study, by inviting distinguished speakers from abroad. This year, Mr. Pascal
Gossin, from the Swiss Federal Office of Justice, and Dr. Thomas Cassuto, from the Tribunal de Grand
Instance de Nanterre, France, were invited as speakers to the programme. They presented papers on“International Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters” and “Effective Legal and Practical Measures for
Combating Corruption: The French System”, respectively.

B. Regional Forum on Good Governance for East Asian Countries
UNAFEI and the Supreme Public Prosecutors Office of Japan co-hosted a Regional Forum on Good
Governance for East Asian Countries which was held at UNAFEI on 10 and 11 December 2008. The themeof the Forum was “Strengthening of Domestic and International Co-operation for Effective Investigation
and Prosecution of Corruption”, and it was attended by high-ranking officials from 13 East Asian countries:
Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Japan, Republic of Korea, Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar, thePhilippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam.
C. Assisting UNAFEI Alumni Activities
Various UNAFEI alumni associations in several countries have commenced, or are about to commence,research activities in their respective criminal justice fields. It is, therefore, one of the important tasks of
UNAFEI to support these contributions to improve the crime situation internationally.
D. Overseas Missions
Mr. Koji Yamada (Professor) and Ms. Akane Uenishi (Staff) visited the Philippines from 15 to 24 January

13

ANNUAL REPORT FOR 2008

2008 to attend the In-Country Training Programme for the Revitalization of the PPA Volunteer Probation
Aide System.
Mr. Shintaro Naito (Professor) and Mr. Ikuo Kosaka (Staff) visited Bali, Indonesia from 27 January to 6
February 2008 to observe the Second Conference of the States Parties to the United Nations Convention
against Corruption. They also visited Bangkok, Thailand to make preparations for the Second Regional
Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries.
Director Keiichi Aizawa and Mr. Junichiro Otani (Professor) visited Vienna, Austria from 13 to 20 April
2008 to attend the 17th Session of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. The Director
made a statement to the Commission.
Ms. Tae Sugiyama (Professor) visited Canada from 29 April to 4 May 2008 to attend an International
Meeting of Experts at the International Centre for Criminal Law Reform and Criminal Justice Policy. The
topic of the meeting was “International Study of Suspension, Recall and Revocation Legislation, Policies,
Practices and Processes”.
Deputy Director Takeshi Seto and Mr. Jun Oshino (Professor) visited China from 7 to 17 May 2008 tomeet with personnel from various criminal justice organizations and to prepare for the 14th Special Seminar
for Criminal Justice Officials of the People’s Republic of China, which was held in March 2009.
Director Keiichi Aizawa visited the Philippines from 28 to 31 May 2008 to prepare for the Third Regional
Seminar on Good Governance for Southeast Asian Countries, to be held in Manila in December 2009.
Mr. Shintaro Naito (Professor) visited Busan and Seoul, Korea from 8 to 13 June 2008 to attend theHigh Level Prosecutors Meeting of the 5th International Association of Prosecutors Asia-Pacific Regional
Conference.
Director Keiichi Aizawa, Deputy Director Takeshi Seto, Mr. Shintaro Naito (Professor), Mr. Etsuya
Iwakami (Staff), and Mr. Ikuo Kosaka (Staff) visited Bangkok, Thailand from 20 to 26 July 2008 as co-hostsof the Second Regional Seminar on Good Governance. The focus of the Seminar was “Corruption Control in
Public Procurement”.
Ms. Tae Sugiyama (Professor) and Mr. Tetsuya Sugano (Professor) visited Kenya from 26 July to
22 August 2008 and 1 August to 5 September 2008 respectively. The purpose of the trip was to visit
children’s institutions, observe the conditions of the treatment of children and the activities of volunteer
children’s officers, and exchange ideas with and provide advice to the staff of the Children’s Departmentof the Ministry of Gender, Children and Social Development. The professors also gave lectures at training
seminars.
Deputy Director Takeshi Seto and Mr. Junichiro Otani (Professor) visited Costa Rica and Argentina from
16 to 30 August 2008. In Costa Rica they jointly hosted with ILANUD an international training course on
Criminal Justice System Reforms in Latin America in which six countries participated. In Argentina, theyheld a follow-up seminar, focusing on the particular situation in that country.
Director Keiichi Aizawa, Mr. Koji Yamada (Professor) and Mr. Yuichi Shirakawa (Staff) visited Ulan Bator,
Mongolia from 25 to 30 August 2008 to attend the 12th ACPF World Conference.
Mr. Shintaro Naito (Professor) visited Singapore from 26 to 30 August 2008 to attend the 13th Annual
Conference and General Meeting of the International Association of Prosecutors.
Mr. Tetsuya Sugano (Professor) visited Prague, the Czech Republic, from 26 October to 2 November
2008 to participate in the 10th ICPA (International Corrections and Prisons Association) Annual General
Meeting.

14

MAIN ACTIVITIES OF UNAFEI

Deputy Director Takeshi Seto went to Medellin, Columbia, from 3 to 10 November 2008, to attend
the Second Expert Group Meeting for the Elaboration of the Digest of Terrorist Cases for Practitioners,
organized by the UNODC and the Government of Colombia.
Mr. Koji Yamada (Professor) visited the Philippines from 17 to 26 November 2008 to participate as ashort-term expert in the In-Country Training Programme for the Enhancement of the Volunteer Probation
Aide System. Professor Yamada gave lectures to the participants of the In-Country Training Programme.
Mr. Ryuji Tatsuya (Professor), Mr. Kenichiro Koiwa (Staff) and Ms. Miki Usuki (Staff), visited Langkawi,
Malaysia from 23 to 28 November 2008 to attend the 28th Asian and Pacific Conference of Correctional
Administrators.
Director Keiichi Aizawa visited Courmayeur, Italy, and Geneva, Switzerland from 12 to 17 December
2008. Director Aizawa attended the ISPAC (International Scientific and Professional Advisory Council)
International Conference on Organised Crime in Art and Antiquities, and the 2008 Co-ordination Meeting of
the Programme Network Institutes, respectively.
Deputy Director Takeshi Seto visited Vienna, Austria, from 17 to 21 December 2008 to attend the Openended Intergovernmental Working Groups on Technical Assistance of the UNCAC.

E. Assisting ACPF Activities
UNAFEI co-operates and collaborates with the ACPF to improve crime prevention and criminal justiceadministration in the region. Since UNAFEI and the ACPF have many similar goals, and a large part of
ACPF’s membership consists of UNAFEI alumni, the relationship between the two is very strong.
VII. HUMAN RESOURCES
A. Staff
In 1970, the Government of Japan assumed full financial and administrative responsibility for running
the Institute. The Director, Deputy Director and approximately nine professors are selected from among
public prosecutors, the judiciary, corrections, probation and the police. UNAFEI also has approximately 15
administrative staff members, who are appointed from among officials of the Government of Japan, and alinguistic adviser. Moreover, the Ministry of Justice invites visiting experts from abroad to each training
course and seminar. The Institute has also received valuable assistance from various experts, volunteers andrelated agencies in conducting its training programmes.
B. Faculty Changes
Mr. Ikuo Kamano, a Professor of UNAFEI, left UNAFEI on 11 January 2008.
Mr. Haruhiko Higuchi, a Professor of the National Police Academy, joined UNAFEI as a Professor on 11
January 2008.
Ms. Kayo Ishihara, a Professor of UNAFEI, was transferred and appointed to the Ministry of Justice on 1
April 2008.
Mr. Junichiro Otani, a public prosecutor, joined UNAFEI as a Professor on 1 April 2008.

VIII. FINANCESThe Ministry of Justice primarily provides the Institute’s budget. UNAFEI’s total budget for its
programmes is approximately ¥95 million per year. Additionally, JICA and the ACPF provide assistance for
the Institute’s international training courses and seminars.

15