Canadian Ministry of Justice to conduct assessment of

UNCLAS KINGSTON 001640 SIPDIS This is an action request please see para 5. STATE FOR INL/LP NBozzolo, KBrown, WHA/CAR Justice for RLipman SIPDIS SENSITIVE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: SNAR AFIN ASEC JM SUBJECT: Canadian Ministry of Justice to conduct assessment of Office of Public Prosecutor (DPP) beginning January 2008, USG participation requested. ¶1. Summary. As a follow on to a cooperative effort between the Canadian Bar Association and the Jamaican Justice System Reform Task Force, and to correct some gaps identified by Canada in the recently concluded Justice Sector Reform Project, the Canadian Ministry of Justice will conduct a comprehensive assessment of the DPP. The assessment is scheduled to being in January 2008. The Canadian government has requested USG participation in this endeavor. End Summary. ¶2. (SBU) When the Canadian Ministry of Justice reviewed the results of the Jamaican Justice System Reform Project, published in June 2007, it was concerned that the Reform focused too much on the concerns expressed by the private defense bar and did not take into account the GOJ's Justice and Security concerns. (Note: the full text of the Reform Project is available at: http://moj.gov.jm/jamaicanjustice/index.htm) In particular, the GOC determined that the review of the DPP presented in the final report had been a cursory effort at best, and that the GOC could not use the results of the Reform Project as a base upon which to focus its bilateral assistance efforts. ¶3. (SBU) As a consequence, the Canadian Ministry of Justice decided to conduct a full review of Jamaica's Prosecutorial Service. The USG, through the Narcotics Affairs Section, was asked to provide input into the Ministry's Action Plan prior to negotiations between the GOC and GOJ. In addition, the Canadian team requested two U.S. experts to assist them in its assessment. The USG has been asked to provide a prosecutor from either the Federal or an appropriate State service, and a personnel/management expert (not necessarily a legal professional) to assess the DPP's operations, and work environment. ¶4. (U) The Assessment will review the following: -- The criminal process, the DPP's involvement in investigation, arrest, processing of accused, trial and post-trial, and the relationship between the DPP and the police force -- Status of the DPP, model used, place in state apparatus, etc -- Responsibilities of the DPP, role of prosecutors if any investigations, responsibility for the decision to prosecute, guidelines used to determine if a case goes forward, relationship between DPP and Ministry of Justice, relationship between DPP and the Attorney General, high-profile case handling, role of prosecutor in implementing court decisions, if any -- Structure of the DPP, size, hierarchy, administrative units, lines of accountability, level of funding -- Personnel of the DPP, criteria and methods for recruitment, level of the personnel (i.e. pay scale rating in the civil service system),mix of personnel (lawyers/non-lawyers),use of paralegals or legal assistants, permanency, career prospects, continuing legal or other educational opportunities, etc -- Control Systems, self-regulating, code of conduct, disciplinary process -- Conflicts and grievances, informal vs. formal, union presence -- Workload, number of cases, nature of cases, complexity of cases -- Prosecutors' Toolkit, manual, library for research, internet research, facilities, equipment, transportation ¶5. (U) NAS Kingston would like to request the advice and assistance of DOJ-OPDAT for this project, to include the funding of an appropriate prosecutor to participate in the Canadian assessment. The Assessment is scheduled to begin in January 2008. ¶6. (SBU) Comment: The timing of the Assessment couldn't be better, as the current head of the DPP, Kent Pantry, who has been in place since 1998 will retire effective February 2008. Pantry has been a friend to the U.S. but he is quite set in his ways regarding the operation of the office and his intransigence and heavy handed leadership style is one of the reasons cited for a massive staff loss nearly two years ago. The appointment of a new Director for the Office will come at the same time as the Assessment is kicking off. Its results therefore, should provide the new Director with a soup-to-nuts analysis of the Office and outline recommendations for change. As such, it is important that the USG participate in the assessment and have a role in the final report. End Comment Heg