Foreign Assistance: Rule of Law Funding Worldwide for Fiscal Years 1993-1998
Published: 1999-06-30T00:00:00

Fast Facts:

Highlights:
section_title: Why GAO Did This Study
paragraphs: Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO provided information on U.S. rule of law assistance programs and activities, focusing on the: (1) amount of U.S. rule of law funding provided worldwide in fiscal years 1993-1998; and (2) U.S. Departments and agencies involved in providing rule of law assistance.
section_title: What GAO Found
paragraphs: GAO noted that: (1) based on the funding data cognizant Departments and agencies made available, during fiscal years 1993-1998, the United States provided at least $970 million in rule of law assistance to countries throughout the world; (2) the Latin America and the Caribbean region was the largest recipient of U.S. rule of law assistance over the period, accounting for $349 million, or more than one-third of the total assistance; (3) in recent years, Central European countries received an increasingly larger share and, in 1998, Central Europe was the largest regional recipient, accounting for about one-third of all rule of law assistance; (4) the United States provided at least some assistance to 184 countries--ranging from $138 million for Haiti to $2,000 for Burkina Faso; (5) while most countries received less than $1 million, 15 countries, including 7 in Latin America and the Caribbean, accounted for just over half of the total funding; (6) at least 35 entities from various U.S. Departments and agencies have a role in the U.S. rule of law assistance programs; (7) the Departments of State and Justice and the Agency for International Development are the principal organizations providing rule of law training, technical advice, and related assistance; (8) the Department of Defense, the U.S. Information Agency, numerous law enforcement agencies and bureaus, and other U.S. Departments and agencies also have a direct role; (9) 40 countries in the Latin America and the Caribbean region received some rule of law assistance; (10) more than three-fourths of the $349 million in assistance was provided to seven countries; (11) Haiti received nearly $138 million, or about 40 percent of the regional total, largely in connection with U.S. and international efforts to restore order and democracy after a September 1991 military coup; (12) six other countries in the region--ranging from about $41 million for El Salvador to $12 million for Panama--accounted for about $127 million, or nearly 37 percent of the regional total; (13) most of the rule of law assistance for Latin America and the Caribbean was provided to help the countries reform their criminal justice or law enforcement organizations, including training and technical assistance for prosecutors, public defenders, police officers, and investigators; and (14) a substantial amount was also dedicated to improving court operations, including modernizing court administration and enhancing public access to the judicial system.

section_title: Letter
paragraphs: In the early 1980s, the United States began helping Latin American  countries improve their judicial and law enforcement organizations as a  way to support democratic principles and institutions.  Until 1990, the  United States provided this “rule of law” assistance primarily to countries  in Latin America and the Caribbean.  With the breakup of the Soviet Union,  the Congress directed that part of the U.S. assistance to Central and  Eastern Europe target the development of democratic institutions,  including an independent judiciary.  Since then, the United States has  provided rule of law and related assistance to these and other regions of  the world.
You expressed concern that comprehensive information was not readily  available about the various U.S. rule of law assistance programs and  activities.  At your request, we examined U.S. rule of law assistance  programs and placed particular emphasis on rule of law activities in Latin  America and the Caribbean.  Specifically, we identified (1) the amount of  U.S. rule of law funding provided worldwide (by region and country) in  fiscal years 1993-98 and (2) the U.S. departments and agencies involved in  providing rule of law assistance.  As agreed with your offices, we are also  providing more detailed information about the use of rule of law assistance  in Latin America and the Caribbean.  We are reporting separately on  coordination efforts among the cognizant agencies in Washington, D.C., and on the specific U.S. rule of law efforts in five Latin American  countries.
Data on U.S. rule of law funding was not readily available, and some  entities could not provide funding data for all the years of interest or had  other problems in compiling the information we requested.  Also, because  the departments and agencies involved did not have an agreed-upon  definition of what constitutes rule of law activities, we relied on each  agency to provide us information for those activities it considered rule of  law.  In addition, we requested obligation data but were told by agency  officials that what we received was a mix of obligated amounts and actual  expenditures.  Much of U.S. rule of law assistance supported long-term  programs—sometimes over several years—that were funded by the U.S.  Agency for International Development (USAID) (over 64 percent).   Obligation data better reflected the magnitude of the funding involved in  long-term and other programs because actual expenditures (or requests for  reimbursements) often are not reported until subsequent years.  However,  other rule of law assistance provided, for example by law enforcement  agencies, was relatively low-cost, short-term training or exchange  programs.  In this instance, obligations and actual expenditures were  virtually synonymous.  (See the scope and methodology section for a more  complete discussion of these limitations.)
subsections: section_title: Rule of Law Funding Worldwide
paragraphs: During fiscal years 1993-98, the United States funded rule of law programs  and related activities in countries throughout the world.   Over this period,  rule of law assistance totaled at least $970 million.  Figure 1 illustrates the  worldwide U.S. rule of law funding for fiscal years 1993-98.  Over the  period, the total annual rule of law funding increased from $128 million to  $218 million.  Although funding appears to have declined substantially in  1996, this may be largely explained by the fact that USAID could not readily  provide rule of law funding information for fiscal year 1996 due to  problems with its automated information system.
On a regional basis, the Latin America and the Caribbean region received  the largest share, with about 36 percent.  Africa, Central Europe, and the  newly independent states of the former Soviet Union received about 15  percent each. (See table 1.)
From fiscal year 1993 to 1998, rule of law funding shifted primarily from the  Latin America and the Caribbean region to other regions, mainly Central  Europe.  Funding for Central Europe grew from about $9 million in fiscal  year 1993 to over $67 million in fiscal year 1998, accounting for 31 percent  of the worldwide rule of law assistance that year.  Over the same period,  rule of law assistance in Latin America and the Caribbean declined from  about $57 million (44 percent of the worldwide total) to $42 million (19  percent).  Rule of law assistance to Africa also declined from $38 million  (30 percent of the worldwide total) in 1993 to $29 million (13 percent) in  1998.  Figure 2 illustrates these trends; appendix I provides more detailed  data.          During fiscal years 1993-98, we identified 184 countries that received at  least some U.S. rule of law funding.  However, over half of this assistance  went to just 15 countries.  Haiti received the most, primarily in connection  with U.S. and international efforts to restore peace and stability to the  country after a 1991 coup.  Most countries (102 of the 184) received less  than $1 million.  Table 2 illustrates the top 15 recipients.  (App. II provides  detailed rule of law funding by region and country for fiscal years 1993-98.)
section_title: U.S. Departments and Agencies Involved in Rule of Law Assistance
paragraphs: State’s Under Secretary for Global Affairs has overall responsibility for  coordinating rule of law programs and activities.  At least 35 entities from  the departments and agencies have a role in providing U.S. rule of law  assistance programs.  (See app. III.)  Most U.S. rule of law funding is  provided through the international affairs appropriations and is transferred  or reimbursed to the other departments and agencies, primarily by USAID,  but to a lesser extent by State.
subsections: section_title: Departments and Agencies Providing Rule of Law Assistance
paragraphs: USAID and the Department of Justice oversaw the implementation of 70  percent, or about $683 million, of all U.S. rule of law assistance programs  and activities worldwide during fiscal years 1993-98.  USAID focused on  improving the capabilities of judges, prosecutors, and public defenders and  their respective institutions as well as increasing citizen access to justice.   Most of Justice’s rule of law activities were carried out by its International  Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program (ICITAP), which  emphasized enhancing the overall police and investigative capabilities of  law enforcement organizations.
State, the Department of Defense, and USIA accounted for about $258  million, or about 27 percent, of the U.S. worldwide efforts.  State’s activities  focused on international narcotics and law enforcement and antiterrorist  assistance.  Defense provided rule of law training to foreign military  servicemembers, but most of its rule of law assistance was provided to  support its operations in Haiti.  USIA focused on increasing the awareness  and knowledge of rule of law issues through various educational programs,  such as exchanges between host country judicial and law enforcement  personnel and their U.S. counterparts.  (See fig. 3.)
section_title: Source of Rule of Law Funding
paragraphs: Funding for rule of law programs and related activities was provided  primarily through the international affairs appropriations for USAID, State,  and USIA.  These three entities accounted for more than 91 percent of all  rule of law funding, or $884 million, in fiscal years 1993-98.  In addition,  Defense provided about $58 million (6 percent).  Although they provided  small amounts of funding, almost all rule of law assistance provided by  Justice, the Treasury, and other departments and agencies was funded  through interagency transfers and reimbursements from USAID and, to a  lesser extent, State.
section_title: Rule of Law Assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean
paragraphs: As previously noted, the Latin America and the Caribbean region was the  largest recipient of U.S. rule of law assistance in fiscal years 1993-98.  As  with the overall worldwide rule of law assistance, we identified the funding  and recipients and the departments and agencies involved.  In addition, we  categorized the rule of law assistance provided to the region to help  describe what the overall purposes of the assistance were.
subsections: section_title: Recipients of Rule of Law Assistance in the Region
paragraphs: In fiscal years 1993-98, the United States provided $349 million in rule of  law assistance to Latin America and the Caribbean (about 36 percent of the  worldwide total).  Forty countries in the region received a portion of this  assistance, although the funding was concentrated among a few countries.   Seven countries accounted for about 76 percent of the total regional  funding.  Two of the seven—Haiti and El Salvador—accounted for just over  50 percent of the regional total, with $137.9 million and $40.7 million,  respectively.  (See fig. 4.)
Haiti was a special case.  The United States provided large amounts of  assistance during this period in an attempt to restore order and democracy  after a coup in 1991.  Nearly one-third of the assistance for Haiti was a $42.6 million, one-time commitment from Defense in 1994 for equipment,  supplies, and other support to assist international police monitors and a  multinational force.  In subsequent years, Haiti continued to be the top  recipient of rule of law funds in the region, receiving $35.5 million in fiscal  year 1995, $16 million in 1996, and about $15 million in fiscal years 1997 and  1998.  Most of this assistance was provided to develop and support a  civilian national police force.
section_title: Rule of Law Assistance Activities in the Region
paragraphs: To help illustrate what rule of law assistance was used for in the Latin  America and the Caribbean region, we grouped rule of law assistance into  one of six categories based on descriptions provided by the cognizant  agencies.  Although we placed each program or activity into one primary  category, many programs, USAID’s in particular, had multiple purposes that  could be identified with more than one category.  Figure 5 illustrates the  distribution of rule of law assistance by these categories.  (App. IV defines  the categories we used and provides funding levels by country and  category.)
The largest rule of law category was assistance for criminal justice and law  enforcement.  About $199 million—57 percent of the regional total for  fiscal years 1993-98—was dedicated to these activities.  We included  assistance to police, prosecutors, public defenders, and other host country  agencies (such as customs) that take on law enforcement functions, as well  as antinarcotics and antiterrorism assistance, in this category.  Almost  every country in the region that received rule of law assistance had some  criminal justice and law enforcement funding.  Haiti received the largest  amount of such assistance—$72.5 million.  Other major recipients were El  Salvador ($25.9 million), Colombia ($19.9 million), Panama ($11.2 million),  and Bolivia ($9.8 million).  Virtually all of the assistance provided through  Justice and most of the funding provided by USAID and State was in this  category.
Assistance for judicial and court operations was the second largest  category, comprising $74.2 million (21 percent of the regional total).   USAID provided 88 percent of the funding.
Assistance for civil government and military reform was the third largest  category—$47.6 million (13.6 percent).  We included assistance for  governmental entities other than the courts and criminal justice and law  enforcement systems in this category.  The largest single element was $42.6  million provided by Defense to Haiti in 1994.  In addition, we included most  of the military service training on topics such as civil-military relations and  professional skills for maritime and military personnel.
Much less funding was devoted to the other categories—$22 million for  democracy and human rights, $5.3 million for general and other activities,  and $1.1 million for law reform.  In the category of democracy and human  rights, we included civic education activities, as well as some efforts that  focused specifically on human rights, citizen participation, and related  topics.  In the general/other category, we included most of the legal  education grants provided by USIA, as well as assistance on various topics  such as intellectual property rights and drug education and rehabilitation.
section_title: Scope and Methodology
paragraphs: To determine how much U.S. rule of law assistance was provided  worldwide in fiscal years 1993-98, and to identify the U.S. departments and  agencies involved, we reviewed program documentation and interviewed  officials at the Department of State, USAID, the Department of Defense,  and USIA—the principal sources of funding for U.S. rule of law programs.   These officials identified other departments and agencies with rule of law  activities.  We asked officials from each of these entities to provide funding  and descriptive information for its activities over the period.
However, most of these departments and agencies did not have rule of law  funding information readily available and had to initiate ad hoc efforts to  compile data addressing our questions.  Further complicating this effort  was the fact that the departments and agencies did not have a commonly  accepted definition of what constituted rule of law activities. Therefore,  we relied on each department and agency (and the bureaus and offices  within those entities) to provide us information on the programs and  activities it considered rule of law.  In some instances, programs with an  apparent rule of law element were not included.  For example, USAID did  not include all of its assistance for human rights, and State did not include  all of its antinarcotics assistance.
Additionally, the funding data is a mix of obligated amounts and actual  expenditures.  For agencies (primarily USAID) that provided rule of law  assistance over several years, obligation data better reflected the  magnitude of the funding involved because actual expenditures (or  requests for reimbursement) may not be reported until subsequent years.   However, other rule of law assistance provided, for example by law  enforcement agencies, was relatively low-cost, short-term training or  exchange programs.  In this instance, obligations and actual expenditures  were virtually synonymous.  Therefore, we used actual expenditures.
Because of the volume of data—almost 4,600 program and activity  records—and the lack of documentation in some agencies, we did not  independently verify the accuracy of the data provided.  Some agencies  could not provide data for the entire period—fiscal years 1993-98—or  lacked funding amounts for some identified rule of law activities.
USAID’s automated information system could not provide worldwide  data for fiscal year 1996.  The system was upgraded that year, and 1996  information was not captured in the new system nor was it available in  USAID’s prior system.  At our request, USAID polled each of its missions  in Latin America and the Caribbean to obtain rule of law funding data,  including fiscal year 1996; however, because of the magnitude of the  effort, we did not request that USAID do the same for the other regions  of the world.  To help mitigate this limitation, we used information from  other agencies indicating USAID rule of law funding for 1996.  However,  this information likely understates USAID’s assistance levels to regions  other than Latin America and the Caribbean for the year.
State’s Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs  provided us funding information for fiscal years 1997 and part of 1998.   Essentially, this office transferred rule of law funds to U.S. law  enforcement and related agencies to assist their foreign counterparts.   Therefore, for the other years, we relied on the U.S. recipients of this  funding to report the amount of rule of law funding provided by the  Bureau.
In addition, for many agencies, the fiscal year 1998 data provided to us was  compiled before the fiscal year data had been finalized and may be  incomplete.  However, with the exception of not having complete USAID  funding information for fiscal year 1996, we believe the funding levels for  the other departments and agencies generally reflect their rule of law  activities.
We performed our work from June 1998 to May 1999 in accordance with  generally accepted government auditing standards.
section_title: Agency Comments
paragraphs: The Departments of Commerce, Defense, Justice, State, and the Treasury;  USAID; and USIA commented on a draft of this report.  Defense and USAID  provided written comments (see apps. V and VI); the others provided oral  comments.  USAID also provided its definition of rule of law. All of the  agencies concurred with the report; some provided technical comments  that have been incorporated, as appropriate.
Unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further  distribution of this report until 15 days after its issue date.  At that time, we  will send copies of this report to the Honorable Madeleine K. Albright, the  Secretary of State; the Honorable William S. Cohen, the Secretary of  Defense; the Honorable Robert E. Rubin, the Secretary of the Treasury; the  Honorable William M. Daley, the Secretary of Commerce; the Honorable J.  Brian Atwood, the Administrator of USAID; the Honorable Penn Kemble,  the Acting Director of USIA; and interested congressional committees.  We  will make copies available to others upon request.
Please contact me at (202) 512-4128 if you or your staff have any questions  about this report.  Key contributors to this report are listed in appendix VII.
section_title: Worldwide U.S. Rule of Law Funding Summary by Region, Fiscal Years 1993-98
paragraphs: Worldwide U.S. rule of law assistance grew from about $128 million in  fiscal year 1993 to about $218 million in fiscal year 1998.  The growth was  not uniform across the geographic regions, with Central Europe increasing  from about $8 million to over $67 million during the period—supplanting  the Latin America and the Caribbean region as the leading recipient of rule  of law assistance.  Table I.1 shows rule of law assistance by region for fiscal  years 1993-98.
We used “multiregional” for rule of law assistance provided to several countries in two or more regions  or when such assistance was not broken out by recipient countries.
section_title: Worldwide U.S. Rule of Law Funding by Region and Country, Fiscal Years 1993-98
paragraphs: In fiscal years 1993-98, the United States provided at least some rule of law  assistance to 184 countries.  The assistance ranged from multiyear  institutional development programs to one-time, short-term training for  police or other law enforcement personnel.  Table II.1 shows the dollar  value of the rule of law assistance provided to all the countries we  identified as receiving some assistance.  In some cases, the assistance was  not identified with a specific country or was provided to countries in  multiple regions—such assistance is identified as “regional” or  “multiregional,” respectively.
Table II.1:  U.S. Rule of Law Funding by Region and Country, Fiscal Years 1993-98 Congo (Brazzaville)
Congo (Kinshasa)
section_title: U.S. Departments and Agencies Involved in Rule of Law Activities
paragraphs: In compiling the rule of law assistance data for this report, we identified 7 cabinet-level departments and 28 related agencies, bureaus, and offices  involved in providing rule of law assistance.  Many are law enforcement  agencies providing training and technical assistance to their counterparts  overseas.  These are listed below.
International Trade Administration
National Telecommunications and Information Administration
Office of General Counsel, Commercial Law Development Program
U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
U.S. Air Force
U.S. Army
U.S. Marine Corps
U.S. Navy
Drug Enforcement Administration
Federal Bureau of Investigation
Immigration and Naturalization Service
Criminal Division
International Criminal Investigative Training Assistance Program
Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development, Assistance and
Bureau of Diplomatic Security, Office of Antiterrorism Assistance
Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs
Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs (formerly Bureau of  Inter-American Affairs)
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms
Office of International Affairs
Office of Investigations
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network
Internal Revenue Service
U.S. Secret Service U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
U.S. Information Agency (USIA)
section_title: U.S. Funding for Rule of Law Assistance Categories for Latin America and the Caribbean, Fiscal Years 1993-98
paragraphs: To develop an overview of the types of activities being funded for the Latin  America and the Caribbean region, we grouped the U.S. rule of law  assistance program data for the region into six categories based on activity  descriptions provided by the cognizant departments and agencies.   Although we placed each program or activity into one primary category,  many programs, USAID’s in particular, had multiple purposes that could be  identified with more than one category.  The following definition for each  category we used and the types of activities we included.
Criminal Justice and Law Enforcement:  Assistance to help criminal justice  or law enforcement organizations make reforms or improve their  capabilities to carry out their responsibilities in a professional and  competent manner.  We included technical assistance and training for  police, prosecutors, public defenders, and other personnel in law  enforcement-related agencies (such as Customs) in this category.   Assistance for police often focused on investigative capabilities and  management improvements.  Technical assistance and training topics  included detection and identification of firearms, development of criminal  investigation units, maritime law enforcement, and detection of counterfeit  currency.  We also included antinarcotics and antiterrorism assistance.
Judicial and Court Operations:  Assistance to help reform or improve  operations of judicial and court systems.  We included activities that  focused on modernizing court administration, training in oral advocacy  skills, training judicial personnel, and establishing procedures for judge  selection and a career ladder for judges.  In addition, we included programs  intended to improve access to the justice system and establish legal aid  services and justice centers; to institute alternative dispute resolution,  mediation, or arbitration procedures in various sectors; and to provide  exchange opportunities, training, or research related to the judicial or legal  system in general.
Civil Government and Military Reform:  Assistance to help promote reform  in other than judicial and law enforcement government agencies, improve  cooperation and understanding between civil and military agencies, or  develop responsive or responsible government institutions and officials.  The majority of the activities were training courses provided by the military  services on topics such as civil-military relations, professional skills for  maritime and military personnel, and military law, although the largest  single item was the funding to support multinational forces and police  monitors in Haiti.  We also included training and related programs on  government ethics and corruption in this category.
Democracy and Human Rights:  Assistance to promote democracy,  electoral reforms, or respect for human rights.  We included USAID human  rights activities and many USIA-funded activities that focused on civic  education, citizen participation, free press, and related topics in this  category.
General/Other Activities:  Assistance that did not fit into other categories or  was not clearly described.  We included legal education grants provided by  USIA and training or exchange programs on an assortment of topics such  as intellectual property rights, drug education and rehabilitation, and  domestic and gender violence.  In addition, we included assistance that had  no description.
Law Reform:  Assistance to help develop, document, or revise  constitutions, laws, codes, regulations, or other guidance that institute and  strengthen the rule of law.  We included activities primarily focused on law  reform, including judicial or criminal procedures code reforms.  However,  some law reform activities may be included in other categories as a  component of a larger program—especially USAID programs that had  multiple goals.
Table IV.1 illustrates the distribution of the rule of law assistance by the  categories we developed among the countries in Latin America and the  Caribbean.  Well over half of all U.S. rule of law assistance to the region  was technical assistance and training for criminal justice and law  enforcement personnel—police, prosecutors, public defenders, and others.
section_title: Comments From the Department of Defense
section_title: Comments From the U.S. Agency for International Development
section_title: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgements
subsections: section_title: GAO Contacts
section_title: Acknowledgements
paragraphs: In addition to those named above, Ann L. Baker, Mark B. Dowling, Marcelo  Fava, Wyley Neal, and Richard Seldin made key contributions to this  report.
The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free. Additional copies are $2 each.  Orders should be sent to the  following address, accompanied by a check or money order made  out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary, VISA and  MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.
Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are  discounted 25 percent.
U.S. General Accounting Office P.O. Box 37050 Washington, DC  20013 Room 1100 700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW) U.S. General Accounting Office Washington, DC Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000 or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and  testimony.  To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list  from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone  phone.  A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain  these lists.