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