12th Session
13 May 2003
by
Antonio Maria Costa
Executive Director
United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime
Mister Chairman,
Distinguished Delegates.
It gives me great pleasure to welcome you to the 12th session of the Commission on Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice. I would like to begin by expressing to you, Mr. Chairman, and to the other members of the Bureau, my most sincere congratulations on your election, together with my pledge that my colleagues and I will do everything in our power to assist you in discharging your demanding tasks.
We are meeting at a particularly important juncture. We are witnessing rapid developments and changes in the world and in international affairs. More and more often, we find ourselves forced to alter our perception of, and approach to many issues, and to seek new and more innovative solutions to emerging concerns. We are realizing that there are new dimensions to many problems that we thought we had fully understood. Our conventional wisdom is challenged daily and we often find ourselves facing threats that until recently we thought would never emerge.
Criminal conduct, or what the Secretary-General has more broadly described with the term "un-civil behaviour", is a typical example of a phenomenon that is constantly shifting and evolving in ways we could not predict. The internationalisation of this behaviour, including major terrorist attacks, has been a painful reminder of the need to be constantly alert and find ways to be agile and effective in both prevention and control. At the same time, the globalization of communications and economic activity has created an environment that is conducive to the unimpeded flow across borders not only of "public goods" but also of "public evils".
New forms of criminal behaviour have emerged or more traditional ones have evolved and gained notoriety very quickly in the time since this Commission was established. Organized crime has become more transnational in nature and expanded to areas, such as trafficking in human beings, that challenge our most basic values and provoke untold pain and suffering to the most vulnerable segments of society. The increased use of modern technology has enabled criminals to launder money, commit large-scale fraud, attack computer systems, or move pornographic material involving children, evading justice or stretching the capacity of law enforcement authorities to the breaking point. Since the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001 on New York and Washington, the world has focused unprecedented attention on terrorism and on the means of countering it. The tragic loss of life in terrorist attacks, such as those in Moscow, Bali and Mombassa, is a dramatic reminder that success in countering this threat remains elusive. The emergence or growth of these forms of crime have caused increased fear to people around the world and have hampered their quest for economic and social development. Increasingly, people demand that their Governments pay more attention, do more, and find ways to resolve, or remove the problems and restore the sense of security that is crucial to the realization of every social and economic objective.
Coupled with these concerns and demands is the growing awareness that there can be no prosperity without basic security. When country performance on crime control is measured against performance in UNDP's human development index, it is clear that those countries with high levels of organized crime have low levels of human development. There is at the same time a more profound realization of the significance of institutions, especially criminal justice institutions, for the maintenance of the rule of law and respect for basic human rights. We have become painfully aware of how fragile these institutions can become at times of crisis, turmoil or conflict, exactly when their role is ever more crucial. We have also witnessed the pernicious effects of rampant crime and lawlessness in the wake of humanitarian disasters. We have further realized that re-building those institutions, or establishing them where they have been demolished, like in cases of conflict, must be one of the top priorities, next to and at an equal footing with efforts to meet what appear to be the most pressing infrastructure needs. At the same time, we are becoming more aware of the complexity of the task of strengthening institutions and building capacity, where it is lacking. We are realizing that it takes commitment, expertise, resources, but also care, flexibility and respect for the cultural, social and legal environment, in which those institutions would be called upon to function.
These were some of the issues that led the General Assembly to make the enhancement of human security, including a life in all societies free of the fear caused by the various forms of un-civil behaviour, an integral component of sustainable development in its Millennium Declaration. I see the work of this Commission and of its Secretariat to be fully in line with the achievement of this long-term goal.
The Commission should think about how it can rise to the challenge presented by current and future realities in crime prevention and criminal justice and the needs of States. And the best way of doing that is to take stock of its achievements, examine critically the areas where it perhaps could have done more, and chart a more responsive course for the future. Stocktaking is a critical activity for any body like this Commission, and an integral element of strategic management. And the moment is auspicious for beginning this process.
Let me explain why.
Looking back at the twelve years of its existence, we will realize that the Commission has set an enviable track record. Immediately upon its establishment, the Commission's first action was to work on the directives given by the General Assembly for the renewal and strengthening of the Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme. It established the provision of reliable and prompt assistance to States that needed it as a cross-cutting priority of the Programme, and of the work of the Secretariat. It also maintained a close watch on the application and use of standards and norms in crime prevention and criminal justice, as another central issue that required continued attention.
At the same time, the Commission identified areas of high importance and urgency that needed immediate action. One of those issues was action against organized crime and among the first decisions that it took was to recommend the organization of the Naples Ministerial Conference. When the Conference was concluded, the Commission became actively engaged in the implementation of its Declaration and Action Plan. It was this body that carried out the crucial negotiations that shaped the mandate of the Ad Hoc Committee that developed the Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its three Protocols.
The Commission was also instrumental in advancing the understanding of the importance of collective action against corruption. It finalized for the approval of the General Assembly the International Code of Conduct for Public Officials and, most importantly, recommended the draft resolution by which the Assembly created the Ad Hoc Committee that is now negotiating the Convention against Corruption.
The Commission also successfully finalized the programme of two congresses on crime prevention and criminal justice, the Ninth in Cairo and the Tenth here in Vienna. It also gave definite shape to the Vienna Declaration that emerged from the Tenth Congress, through the elaboration of plans of action, which have also served as a framework for our work in the past couple of years.
Let us also not forget that it was this Commission that dealt with the issue of terrorism, making rational and workable recommendations, which the General Assembly accepted, establishing the parameters for productive work of our Office in close cooperation with the Counter-Terrorism Committee of the Security Council.
The Commission was also proactive enough to tackle other emerging issues, covering a broad range, from victim assistance, crime prevention and restorative justice to the protection of flora and fauna and action against kidnapping.
Parallel to these developments in the normative sphere, the Secretariat has significantly strengthened its capacity to deliver high-quality technical assistance. The Crime Centre developed four so-called Global Programmes, on Transnational Organized Crime, Human Trafficking, Corruption and Terrorism, respectively. Each of these programmes now comprises a half dozen or more ongoing technical assistance projects, as well as analytical and advocacy-type activities, such as the production of tool kits and manuals. Donors have made available on average $1.5 million in voluntary contributions for each of these programmes, which are carried out by small teams of staff. The Centre has more recently also successfully launched a package of projects on criminal justice reform. Special mention must also be made here of the relatively large projects in Afghanistan designed at the request of Italy, as lead country for the justice sector.
This is all the good news.
The not so good news is that the Commission has not gone far enough to address a chronic ailment of the Crime Prevention and Criminal Justice Programme, that is the disparity between its mandates and the resources available for their implementation. I must say that the situation has improved. I must also say that there are signs that this improvement may not be circumstantial or coincidental, but an indication of modest growth. However, the disparity remains, continuing to be a source of frustration for Member States and for our staff alike, and putting in jeopardy the credibility and viability of the Programme, ironically at a time when the UN and the international community seem to be gaining an appreciation for its potential.
Here there is no room for complacency. The number of operational activities in the crime area are still very modest, compared with those of the Drugs Control Programme, but even more in relation to the colossal challenges facing the international community in the field of crime prevention and criminal justice.
I know that there has been considerable discussion about the breadth and multitude of the Programme's mandates. There have been serious efforts for prioritization and consolidation of these mandates. There have also been appeals to realism, to the effect that we need to be focused and tackle only problems where we can reasonably make a significant contribution towards viable solutions.
The fact of the matter remains, however, that the demands on the Programme are heavy because the needs are great. These demands have also increased because of the added value and relevance of the Programme to many States, especially developing countries and countries emerging from conflict situations. The added value lies in the quality of the products and services that the Programme can deliver. The Programme has consistently placed emphasis on maintaining and improving that quality, a fact that you have recognized on numerous occasions. Its relevance lies in its ability to maintain a pragmatic and technical approach to complex (often also politically charged) issues, and to take a global view, thus enabling countries and national institutions to be inspired by a variety of options that may be available to them.
The Commission needs to reflect on new and innovative ways of addressing this disparity and enable the Crime Programme to grow and reach its full potential in the coming years, heeding the needs of as many Member States as possible. This reflection needs to be done on a solid basis, which could be provided by a critical review of the Programme's mandates, its strengths and weaknesses and of areas where action would produce the best results. On our side, we are discussing with several countries in the middle-income category the option of projects or advisory services on the basis of cost sharing. We are also exploring the feasibility of projects funded by the corporate world, for example capacity building against kidnapping.
Soon, we will be celebrating the entry into force of the Transnational Organized Crime Convention. We now know that the required number of ratifications has been reached and what remains is for three countries to complete the official act of depositing their instruments of ratification. The first two of the Protocols are not far behind in terms of ratifications and would also be coming into force in the near future. The entry into force of the new instruments will pave the way for the Conference of the Parties to begin its work, focusing on ways to foster their implementation. Surely, the success of the Convention will depend on whether the fund-raising mechanism already incorporated in the Convention will be allowed to function, through the generous support of Member States. This will be a condition for the provision of much needed support to those countries which are the worst affected by organized crime and institutionally the least equipped to address it.
In a few months, we will also be celebrating the finalization of the Convention against Corruption and its opening for signature. Again, the entry into force of that Convention will herald a new era of operational work.
We should also not forget that urgent attention must be given to the implementation of the counter-terrorism Conventions and to significantly stepping up the design and delivery of projects in that area in the coming years.
With the two major Conventions against TOC and Corruption completed, the Commission would be able to focus its attention on broader aspects of its mandated work.
I would cluster the work of the Commission into four main areas:
First, the policy-making function. The Commission has been established as the principal policy-making body of the United Nations in the area of crime prevention and criminal justice. Discharging this function would mean that the Commission is alert to developments and concerns and develops a pro-active, rather than reactive approach. While no concern can be dismissed as trivial if it is considered important enough by a Member State to be brought to the attention of the international community, the Commission should develop the ability to reach expeditious agreement on the issues that merit its attention in terms of making policy recommendations at the international level. I see this function of the Commission as both a reflection and a stimulus. A reflection of the sum of national policies, but also a stimulus for review of those policies and the initiation of adjustments or changes, as the case may be. For this function to be effectively performed, the Commission should not shy away from new challenges, perhaps because of possible complexities or political considerations.
Second, the normative function. As I indicated earlier, the Commission was the body that decided that transnational organized crime and corruption were areas where the international community should go ahead and develop binding international legal instruments. The Commission should remain alert and explore areas where the international community can usefully continue to develop international criminal law. Apart from this, however, the Commission should continue to explore areas where the development of standards in the broader area of criminal justice would be useful to the international community and to the advancement of the rule of law.
Third, what I would like to call the "guardian" function. The Commission needs to develop mechanisms for the periodical review of the implementation of standing mandates of the Crime Programme. The guidance of the Commission is crucial for the Programme to maintain its focus and ensure quality of output. This guidance is especially important for the provision by the Programme of timely assistance to requesting States. Technical cooperation is a fundamental function of the Programme and its efficiency needs to be measured and evaluated constantly. Recently, the Programme has been the recipient of an increased number of requests for assistance in institution-building and in the reform of criminal justice in general. The United Nations is also beginning to rely more frequently on the Programme's expertise and experience for activities related to the maintenance or re-establishment of the rule of law in the context of peace-keeping operations. The Commission's oversight is essential in these areas.
Fourth, the resource mobilization function. The Commission has been mandated to mobilize resources for the implementation of the Programme's work. It is essential for the Commission to take clear positions about the requirements of the Programme, both from the regular budget of the United Nations and in terms of extrabudgetary resources. The Commission also needs to develop mechanisms designed to ensure that its recommendations are properly taken into account by the bodies of the General Assembly that are responsible for budgetary matters.
Charting the road ahead has another component. It requires a clear vision on our part as to how we can fulfill our functions in the best and most efficient way possible.
In the past year, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime has worked hard to discharge its mandates in a proactive - rather than a reactive manner. We developed the Office's new medium term Operational Priorities, with which I hope you are familiar by now, since they were circulated last January. These Operational Priorities are functioning as a launching pad and a foundation for the development of an increasingly integrated approach to the interrelated issues of crime, drugs and terrorism. We have made good progress in (a) identifying the areas of synergy in our work against crime and drugs; (b) establishing a matrix structure for our operations, linking technical expertise with regional advisors; and (c) developing a clear nexus between country profiles, country strategies and programmes/projects.
In my view, the integrated approach towards which we are working will increase opportunities for the crime-related activities to expand rapidly and contribute to raising the visibility, relevance and impact of the Crime Programme. I see the rapid expansion of the Crime Programme as one of the success criteria of restructuring. If this Programme would not benefit from it, then something would have gone fundamentally wrong. I also hope that the commitment to good governance, transparency and quality of product, which lie at the root of this approach, will help Member States to see clear to increasing their support and benefit from the Programme's great potential.
Conclusion
The Commission has made significant accomplishments. But it also has a lot of unfinished business. And it can rest assured that, unfortunately, lack of business will not be a problem in the foreseeable future, even if we will all try very hard to reduce it. There are still numerous areas that require its attention and where, by working together, we can hope to make some useful contributions. We owe to the people of this world, who demand more justice and less crime, to spare no effort in that direction. We owe to them to work together in order to invest well the public money they put at our disposal and ensure that the returns are high in terms of security, integrity and the prevalence of the rule of law. Your commitment and support is crucial. We can only reiterate our determination to live up to the highest of your standards.
Thank you for your attention.