http://www.coe.int/documents/5492562/7044393/COE-Logo-Fil-BW.png/bb17a17e-5308-4fc0-929d-5c4baf3ab99d?t=1371222816000

CCPE(2016)2

Bilingue/ bilingual

Strasbourg, 1 mars / March 2016

CONSEIL CONSULTATIF DE PROCUREURS EUROPEENS

CONSULTATIVE COUNCIL OF EUROPEAN PROSECUTORS

(CCPE)

Questionnaire en vue de la préparation de l’Avis n° 11 du CCPE sur la qualité et l’efficacité du travail des procureurs, y compris dans le domaine de la criminalité organisée et de la lutte contre le terrorisme

Questionnaire for the preparation of the Opinion No. 11 of the CCPE on quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, including as regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism

Compilation des réponses au questionnaire

Compilation of replies to the questionnaire


Table of Contents

Andorra / Andorre. 3

Armenia / Arménie. 6

Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan. 19

Bosnia and Herzegovina / Bosnie et Herzégovine. 26

Bulgaria / Bulgarie. 30

Croatia / Croatie. 41

Czech Republic / République tchèque. 49

Denmark / Danemark. 55

Estonia / Estonie. 58

Finland / Finlande. 59

Georgia / Géorgie. 64

Germany / Allemagne. 67

Greece / Grèce. 69

Hungary / Hongrie. 75

Italia / Italie. 82

Latvia / Lettonie. 85

Liechtenstein. 88

Lithuania / Lituanie. 91

Republic of Moldova / République de Moldova. 94

Monaco. 96

Montenegro / Monténégro. 99

Poland / Pologne. 102

Portugal 106

Romania / Roumanie. 114

Russian Federation / Fédération de Russie. 122

Slovakia / Slovaquie. 147

Slovenia / Slovénie. 150

Spain / Espagne. 153

Turkey / Turquie. 156

Ukraine. 164


Andorra / Andorre

1.         Le ministère public de votre pays travaille-t-il  de manière stratégique pour assurer la qualité du travail des procureurs? Si oui, de quelle manière?

Le travail des Procureurs s’organise d’après les directives du Procureur Général ; on essaye de privilégier un nombre d’affaires équitables entre procureurs ainsi que le fait qu’un des procureurs ait connu de l’affaire dans sa permanence, ce qui conduit à optimiser les recours. Le Procureur Général prend connaissance des Arrêts rendus ce qui lui permet de voir la qualité du travail des procureurs, et contrôle le travail des procureurs à l’aide d’une fiche d’affaires restantes. Le nombre absolu de membres du Parquet (5) permet la coordination des matières diverses et variées où participe le Parquet et la distribution équitable des charges de travail entre ses membres et en faveur d’une meilleure qualité de travail.

2.         Quels critères sont essentiels dans votre pays pour assurer la plus haute qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs: indépendance, impartialité, ressources humaines et matérielles, conditions de travail, etc.? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

L’indépendance et impartialité des Procureurs assure l’efficacité du travail ainsi que le sentiment de contribuer à rendre une bonne justice. Quant aux conditions matérielles, nous sommes dans notre pays (Andorre) en phase de débuter (2017) la construction d’un nouveau Palais de Justice. Le Ministère Public participe à l’agencement des locaux du Parquet et donne son avis sur les parties communes (salles d’audience, salles d’interrogatoire des gardes à vue, archives, …) ce qui permet, à un niveau purement matériel de pourvoir à des besoins d’espace, de commodité et d’efficacité de notre travail, le Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature concédant toute son écoute à nos avis.

Quant aux besoins en ressources humaines, c’est un aspect indéniable pour l’efficacité du travail du Ministère Public. Le Procureur Général se charge de faire la demande de personnel administratif et de nouveaux procureurs pour assurer l’efficacité, et est régulièrement entendu sur cet aspect.

3.         Existe-t-il des indicateurs, formels ou informels, utilisés dans votre pays afin d'évaluer la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs, par exemple, le nombre d'affaires examinées, la durée de l'examen, la complexité des affaires examinées  etc.? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

Le travail des procureurs au niveau du nombre d’affaires est contrôlé à l’aide d’un compteur statistique. Vu les dimensions de notre pays, la complexité des affaires est connue de tous, il n’existe pas, à proprement parler, d’indicateurs pour la complexité, même si le procureur Général reste au courant. La difficulté d’une affaire se mesure également au nombre de classeurs qu’elle comporte ce qui est également compté.

Le Procureur Général est au courant des affaires assignées à chaque substitut puisque c’est par des critères que lui-même établit (souvent numériques) que les affaires sont distribuées. Il participe également, autant qu’il le peut aux réunions des Substituts avec les services de Polices, les services sociaux, … ou alors le Substitut lui fait des comptes rendus des réunions pour qu’il puisse en mesurer l’impact, l’efficacité et avoir un certain contrôle sur la situation.

Actuellement la nouvelle régulation de la carrière des Procureurs doit permettre l’établissement d’objectifs au début de chaque année judiciaire de forme raisonnée et raisonnable entre le Procureur Général et le Conseil Supérieur de la Magistrature.

4.         Existe-t-il une procédure formelle ou informelle pour l'évaluation du travail des procureurs : quelle est la fréquence de l'évaluation, qui fait les évaluations, et avec quelles conséquences? Les procureurs ont-ils le droit de présenter des objections formelles ou informelles concernant les résultats de l'évaluation et de ses conséquences?

Dernièrement, un règlement a été voté, en application de la Loi Qualifiée de la Justice, sur le Service d’Inspection de l’Administration de Justice qui aura lieu régulièrement tous les années, pour évaluer l’efficacité du travail de la Justice en général (et également du Parquet) et extraordinairement en cas de nécessité sur une section ou organe judiciaire spécifiquement, les Inspecteurs sont chargés d’en évaluer l’efficacité et mentionner les aspects qui ne fonctionnent pas, en proposant des solutions. Le Parquet qui est également inspecté de la même façon que les Tribunaux de première instance ou supérieurs, aura, en cas de signalement d’un problème, avoir son mot à dire vu qu’une période d’allégations est prévue dans toute procédure d’inspection.

5.         Concernant la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme, des conditions, critères, procédures ou indicateurs spécifiques sont-ils établis pour les procureurs dans votre pays afin de:

- faciliter leur travail?

- évaluer leur travail?

Des formations dans ce domaine sont proposées et dernièrement nous avons eu droit à une enquête sur nos besoins précis en cette matière, ce qui devrait promouvoir l’établissement de formations fonctionnelles et spécifiques en la matière.  

6.         Y a-t-il dans votre pays des réformes législatives récentes visant à lutter plus efficacement contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme ? Comment ces réformes influencent-elles la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

Des réformes législatives au niveau du Code Pénal et du Code de Procédure Pénale sont régulières de façon à rendre plus ample et plus faciles les poursuites contre le terrorisme et le crime organisé. Il faut signaler que dernièrement la réforme de l’article 409 du Code pénal rend plus aisé la poursuite puisque l’éventail des délits origine a été élargi et présente moins d’objections qu’auparavant.

La Principauté  d’Andorre a également souscrit les Conventions Internationales de lutte contre le Terrorisme et le Crime organisé, et d’après la Convention de l’année 1959 d’entraide judiciaire pénale européenne, le Ministère Public est également autorité judiciaire ce qui rend plus aisée notre tâche.

Le Procureur Général participe à la Commission permanente de Prévention du Blanchiment et contre le financement du terrorisme régulièrement dans tous les aspects qui affectent la Justice, s’assurant ainsi un niveau de connaissance transversale et efficace dans la lutte contre le blanchiment d’argent et le financement du terrorisme.

7.         Pensez-vous que les conventions internationales actuelles, ainsi que les organisations internationales comme Eurojust, Europol et Interpol, sont suffisantes pour lutter efficacement contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme?

Eurojust est indéniablement un grand pôle de connexion pour la lutte contre la criminalité organisée le terrorisme et l’aide au niveau des traductions aide notablement les différents pays concernés pour pouvoir agir rapidement et de façon plus efficace. Bien que la principauté d’Andorre ne soit pas État partie d’EURJUST, nous y participons, invités par les États qui y sont partie et nous avons la faculté également de les faire à travers d’IBERRED et les accords que ce dernier organisme a avec EUROJUST.

Andorre n’est pas partie d’Europol, mais elle l’est d’Interpol ce qui contribue au transfert d’information rapide qui facilite notre tâche, mais ce sont réellement les déplacements physiques des différentes Autorités Judiciaires qui vont rendre la tâche des procureurs plus efficace et plus rapide quant ‘à la transmission d’information nécessaire pour les poursuites judiciaires.

8.         Quels sont les principaux défis dans votre pays concernant la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs et, en particulier, de la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme?

La formation globale dans ce domaine et une mise à jour constante, avec des séminaires pratiques, devrait avoir lieu régulièrement pour rendre plus efficace la lutte contre le terrorisme et le crime organisé, qui utilise des méthodologies différentes de façon incessante.


Armenia / Arménie

1.    Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Answer- The RAProsecutor's Office (hereinafter “Prosecutor’s Office”) acts based on the law of the Republic of Armenia on the Prosecutor’s Office (hereinafter “Law”) Part 1 Article 1 of which defines “The Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Armenia is a unified system that is headed by the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Armenia.” Depending on the mentioned unity and the other corresponding provisions, the RA Prosecutor General determines the strategy of resolving core issues of the Prosecutor’s Office.  For maximum high quality performance of the duties set before him by the RA Constitution, the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Armenia aims to execute them with the help of skilled prosecutors, who are experienced and possessthehighest professional,moral and personal characteristics. For that purpose the RA Prosecutor General determines standards by his orders that allow to evaluatequalitative characteristics of prosecutors as well as professional knowledge, personal and other characteristics before recruiting and during the work. That standards are used for the appointment of the prosecutors, encouragement or promotion as well as for the solution of the issue of disciplinary liability.

The first evaluation of the prosecutor’s professional, personal and other characteristics is performed during the recruitment, Qualification Committee formed by the order of the RA Prosecutor General on the basis of Article 23 of the law checks the applicants’ theoretical knowledge through the questionnaire, through the documents presented by the applicants checks whether they are allowed to be appointed to the prosecutor’s post as well as during the direct interview defines other personal charachteristics of the applicant. For the eligibility of the applicant the members of the Qualification Committee make a decision by voting and present it to the Prosecutor General, the latter at its discretion delegates candidates from that list to the “Academy of Justice” (Non-Commercial State Organization), where after additional professional training they are appointed to the prosecutor’s post.  The applicant has the right to appeal any decision of the Qualification Committee to the Prosecutor General as well as to judicial bodies.

The next professional evaluation of the prosecutor is conducted by the attestation on the basis of Article 54 of the law three years after the appointment to the post and once every three years (except the prosecutors appointed to leading posts). The above mentioned process is regulated by law and the corresponding order of the Prosecutor General. The prosecutor’s attestation is taken on the basis of the evaluation of the superior prosecutor. The evaluation contains data about prosecutor’s practical, personal characteristics and about the results of his professional activity. It should be justified and based on the cocnclusions of the reports about his/her work presented once a year by the prosecutor to his/her direct supervisor starting from the period of the previous attestation. The prosecutor who takes the attestation gets acquainted with that assessment before discussing it with the Qualification Committee. If the prosecutor disagrees with his/her evaluation, he/she can appeal it to the Prosecutor General.

After discussing the prosecutor’s qualitative charchteristics the Qualification Committee can not only decide whether he/she suits to the post held and offer the Prosecutor General to continue his/her work, but also can offer to include him/her in the promotion list to assign him/her to higher posts and to confer the special  rank as a reward, as well as for bad and inefficient work can offer to dismiss him/her from his/her post or to assign to a lower post or send to additional trainings to increase professional knowledge i.e. his/her qualitative characteristics. In all the above mentioned cases when disagreeing with the Qualification Committee’s decision,the prosecutor’s right to appeal is registered. The principle of publicity of the prosecutor’s work envisaged by law is also directed toward increasing the quality of the prosecutor’s work, according to which the prosecutor can’t hide his/her work from public and he/she can be dispraised for inefficient work, also get high appreciation of the society as a result of which he/she will be praised or accoladed.

The next strategic methods to increase the quality of the prosecutor’s work are provisions fixed in Articles 6 and 7 of the law according to which In the exercise of his/her powers, based on laws and inner conviction, each prosecutor makes decisions on his/her own, and he/she is responsible for his/her decisions. Any interference with the prosecutor’s activities, which is not prescribed by law, is prohibited” and   “A prosecutor can not be a member of any party or be engaged in any other political activity. Under any circumstances, a prosecutor should act neutrally and politically in a restrained way.” These provisions apply to the relations of superior and inferior prosecutors, also to possible interventions of government officials, as a result of which the prosecutor’s independence, creative and professional displays are secured, personal, professional and any other kind of dependence is excluded and accordingly personal liability for the legitimacy of actions and made decisions is secured i.e. the quality of performed work. The prosecutor also has other restrictions prescribed by law as well as merits that are directed to increase the quality of prosecutor’s work and to exclude corruption risks.

Some provisions of the prosecutor’s main responsibilities defined by Article 42 of the law are also directed toward the provision of the prosecutor’s professional and high quality, according to which the prosecutor should be familiar with the legal acts defining his/her rights and responsibilities concerning with the post held, comply with the requirements of the Constitution, laws, and other legal acts, ensure professional qualifications and practical skills, ensure the protection of rights and legitimate interests of humans and citizens, examine and implement offers, applications, complaints in the established terms and procedure etc.

Incentive tools and disciplinary sanction measures prescribed for violations and imperfections, drawbacks in case of inefficient work are also strategic methods directed toward the increase of the prosecutor’s work quality. Disciplinary  measures as well as incentive tools are prescribed by precise procedure, which are registered by the orders of the RA Prosecutor General since in the RA Prosecutor General’s order  about the incentive is mentioned for which conduct of the prosecutor he/she is being awarded. The basis also include provision of office and professional  high qualities. Disciplinary sanction is prescribed for showing low qualitative results of the prosecutor’s work, for not fullfilling the requirements of legal acts and other violations, imperfections and drawbacks. For not allowing the above-mentioned, the prosecutor should work on himself/herself to increase his/her working, qualitative and professional charchteristics and create basis for award by which one can avoid conducting behaviour which results in disciplinary sanction. There is a precise procedure of disciplinary sanction, in different phases of which the prosecutor’s right to appeal to a superior as well as to the judicial review the activities and decisions of the official (officials) executing disciplinary proceedingsagainst him/her is defined.

2.    Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Answer-  The high quality of prosecutor’s work is considered to be the conduct that corresponds to the Code of Conduct for Prosecutors established by the RA Prosecutor General, where the prosecutor’s behaviour in an internal and external employment relations are included. The Code of Conduct for prosecutors is conditioned by the realization of the importance of the prosecutor’s activity in the formation of rule of law state and civil society, by maintaining moral, psychological and legal traditions and by the necessity of strengthening criteria of the work of prosecutors corresponding to the principles of the international law, by the realization of keeping provisions of the Recommendations number r(2000)19 and r(94)12 of the Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe,  the Code of Conduct forPublicOfficials protecting the legal orderaccepted 17.12.1979 by the UN General Assembly by resolution 34/169, the European Conventionfor the Protection of Human Rights andFundamentalFreedoms, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, principles of the Constitution, democracy and the rule of law, by the essential significance of his/her conduct in the effective activity of the whole prosecutorial system, key role of each prosecutor performing functions in the field of law enforcement and justice making, by the necessity of keeping the independence of prosecutors and obeying the law in an internal and external employment relations, by determination of ensuring guarantees contributing to complete protection of freedoms and human rights in the country, independence and impartiality of the prosecutors, establishment prosecutorial activity corresponding to standards accepted by the international society.

The basic principles of a prosecutor’s behaviour are set out in the Code of Conduct for Prosecutors. Particularly, it is identified that when carrying out one’s activities a prosecutor with his practical, professional and moral characteristics must promote the provision of independence of prosecutorial activities and formation of credibility among the society towards prosecutor’s office; to uphold the reputation of the prosecutor’s office, with the help of personal conduct inspire credibility and respect towards the prosecutorial system and oneself, in any circumstances and cases uphold prosecutor’s calling and good name, honour and dignity, act in such a way that there will appear no unnecessary suspicion about his impartiality and candour, being led by the RA legislation take measures to strengthen legality, to ensure making laws, to determine and eliminate the causes of offence and the favourable conditions for committing offence, to protect human rights and fundamental freedoms, to support their realization, to ensure the proper level of skilful and professional knowledge on a regular basis, to be aware of the changes in legislation, to expand own  professional knowledge and regularly help colleagues to enlarge their knowledge, to assist colleagues if necessary, to the extent possible, be engaged in scientific and pedagogical activities, to carry out research concerning  especially the organisation and activities of the prosecutor’s office, be law-abiding, honest, disciplined, restrained, sincere, careful, well-mannered, be man of principal, impartial and assertive, be intolerant of colleagues who make mistakes or behave immorally, to act in accord with the principle of  equality before the law.

A prosecutor acts as openly as it does not contradict human and citizen rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, as well as keeping unpublished other state and legally protected secrets.

A prosecutor must be consistent when maintaining restrictions prescribed by law.

A prosecutor executing his powers is independent and is subject only to law. He/she can’t be a member of a political organization, as well as to be involved in politics in any way. He should not provide sponsorship towards any political party.        

A prosecutor can’t be a member of such professional or social organizations the activity of which is relating to ethnic, national, religious or physical disability discrimination.

A prosecutor may take part in the discussion of projects on legal acts and issues on doing justice, expansion and protection of human rights.  

A prosecutor must carry out one’s official activities entirely by himself and unprejudiced, independent of illegal impact of legislative, executive and other state authorities, local authorities, social and political organizations, officials or other people, as well as relatives, friends and acquaintances, avoid any impact of individual or group interests, mass media or local, personal, national or political impact, be free of the concern of being criticised.

A prosecutor must encourage the formation of moral and psychological atmosphere in relations with colleagues, be respectful, even-minded to the co-workers, and respect opinions of the others, not to interfere illegitimately with the process of executing powers of the others, not to publicise office or state secret which was revealed to him, to exercise powers conferred upon him, willing to help and support his colleagues.

A prosecutor has the right to freely express one’s opinion on solutions of issues concerning their professional activity, to be self-confident, simultaneously he can’t be led by suppositions, emotions, individual attitude of parties, behaviour and other indirect impact.

A prosecutor must accept comprehensively his imperfections and drawbacks revealed while carrying out his official activities and impartial criticism, coming to necessary conclusions he/she must take measures to eliminate them.

A prosecutor must listen to others’ opinions, respect them and be tolerant of opposing viewpoints.

Besides all of these characteristics the RA Prosecutor General is more demanding and pays much attention to the professional quality of a prosecutor, his/her impartiality, candour, objectivity, human and moral characteristics, diligence. The Prosecutor General is intolerant of any form of corruption, of cases of violation of criminal procedural norms and improper implementation practice when executing one’s office duties.

A prosecutor’s rights to vacation prescribed by law and social merits are means directed to enhance productivity of prosecutor’s work. A prosecutor is given 30 working days and 4 additional days of paid vacation, during which the rest of the prosecutor is arranged and rehabilitation after a hard and strained job.

Besides that the prosecutors are involved in the compulsory social insurance program and they are beneficiaries of medical, educational, hypothec loans and holiday packages, which give right to care for one’s health, rest and suchlike other issues. 

3.    Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

                                        

Answer: Besides the above-mentioned strategic measures the RA prosecutor general takes tactical measures to assess, improve and supervise the quality of prosecutor’s work, which arise from strategic measures and complete their requirements. A part of them was described in the first point of the given questionnaire, but besides them there exist some others.

To fulfil the requirements of the RA Finance and Economics Minister’s order N 324-N dated 28.03.2007 and in that regard the RA Prosecutor General’s order N 122 dated 27.12.2013 reports on non-financial figures made of 14 criteria about prosecutorial powers and activities on quarterly, semi-annual, nine months’ and annual basis for that given fiscal year from the structural subdivisions of the RA Prosecutor General’s office and from the prosecutor’s offices making the RA prosecutor’s office are being received, checked, analysed and summed per annum. These reports are included into the reports on financial figures of the RA prosecutor’s office and are presented to the RA Ministry of Finance, after which the financing of the RA prosecutor’s office is being provided.

The RA Prosecutor General’s order N 20 dated 02.05.2011 defines the statistical standards on the prosecutor’s work. At the same time it is also a form of filling in and presenting semi-annual (quarterly) and annual statistical report “On Prosecutor’s Work” got from prosecutor’s offices as well as from the RA Prosecutor General’s office senior prosecutors (prosecutors) and structural subdivisions of Prosecutor General’s office (hereinafter report). This report is presented to the RA Prosecutor General’s office by the prosecutors of prosecutor’s offices, structural subdivisions and senior prosecutors on semi-annual and annual basis, and for the crimes of corruptive nature reports are presented on the quarterly basis as well. These reports reflect the quality and productivity of a prosecutor’s work for the mentioned period.

The report comprises of sections, with corresponding names and numbering which consist of one or several tables with corresponding names and numbering, and these tables include columns and lines with corresponding names and numbering which are to be completed.

The report comprises 15 sections among them:

Section 1. On initiating criminal prosecution (comprises a table).

Section 2. On supervision over legality of inquiry and investigation (comprises 2 tables).

Section 3. On defence of charges in court (comprises a table). 

Section 4. On filing a lawsuit about defence of state interests (comprises 8 tables).

Section 5. On appealing  judicial acts (comprises 4 tables).

Section 6. On supervision over legality of penalties and other means of compulsory measures (comprises 4 tables).

Section 7. On the results of investigation of crimes against human beings (comprises 11 tables).

Section 8. On the results of investigation of crimes against property and economic activity (comprises 11 tables).

Section 9. On the results of investigation of ordinary crimes (comprises 11 tables).

Section 10. On the results of investigation of cases investigated by national security bodies and cybercrimes (comprises 11 tables).

Section 11. On the results of investigation on corruption-related crimes (comprises 11 tables).

Section 12. On the results of investigation of crimes connected with illegal turnover of narcotic drugs (comprises 11 tables).

Section 13. On discussion of applications, claims and about the work concerning their implementation (comprises a table).

Section 14. On the publicity of the prosecutor’s office activities (comprises 2 tables).

Section 15. On international legal cooperation (comprises 2 tables).

The number of the report sections, tables comprising them as well as the columns and lines mentioned there, with corresponding names and numberings, are not final and in course of time and out of reporting period necessity as well as conditioned by legislative changes may regularly change or be changed (amended, added, reduced, etc.).

The way of making and presenting the report prescribes which prosecutor’s offices, structural subdivisions and senior prosecutors acting in the RA should complete and present each report, which table, when and how it should be done.

The proper and perfect completion of the reports is organized, managed and supervised by the senior prosecutors (prosecutors) of the Prosecutor General’s office, prosecutors managing structural subdivisions and prosecutor’s offices. They check and sign under the reports before presenting them. They are responsible for the completeness and precision of the statistical data reflected in the reports and for presenting these reports in the established period.

The statistical data is being completed and their credibility and accuracy are being checked with the primary accounting documents and books.

A single number is filled in the cell at the intersection of the corresponding column and row of the statistical forms of the sections of the report, taking into consideration and complying with each other the requirements (possible formulas) in the manner prescribed and given in the column and row for filling them as well as taking into account the data in the reports of the same name presented in previous reporting periods.      

The report is presented in hard copy and electronic versions.

After presenting the reports on “The work of Prosecutor” to the Prosecutor General’s Office of the RA, the numbers included in them are being filled in and added in the corresponding sheet of the “Excel” computer calculating program, a single sheet of aggregate numerical data is created, the hard copy and electronic versions of which are made and provided to the RA Prosecutor General, his deputies, the specialized departments of the Prosecutor General’s Office etc. who use them to make relevant analysis and make conclusions according to separate spheres, territories or institutions and, if necessary, the copies are provided to other concerned bodies and organizations.              

In case of inconsistencies and (or) inaccuracies in the statistical data the report is returned to the presenter to correct the data and to present it again in the prescribed manner.

The technical characteristics and statistical standards of creation and installation of the computer operating system (program) of keeping statistics in the RA Prosecution System that define the need of creation and installation, the aim and grounds, the main requirements (statistical standards) and objectives, the description of the program and computer network (including the present condition and the description of the program being suggested), the stages of creation and installation of the program etc., are also established by the order No 20 of the RA Prosecutor General dated May 02, 2011.

The table of the average workload of the prosecutors of the RA Prosecutor’s Office is created on some standards, taken from the statistical report, established by the order No 20 of the RA Prosecutor General dated May 02, 2011, using the table the workload of the prosecutors of the Prosecutor’s Offices are compared to each other and by making the staff redundant in the relatively less overloaded Prosecutor’s Offices and by transferring the prosecutor appointed in that post to the most overloaded Prosecutor’s Offices, the quality and effectiveness of the work of the prosecutors of the relatively the most overloaded Prosecutor’s Offices is ensured and the issue of average workload of the prosecutors is solved, which helps to increase the quality and effectiveness of the work.

The sample form of the report on semi-annual and annual work done and presented by the senior prosecutors and prosecutors of the RA Prosecutor General’s Office, by structural subdivisions of the RA Prosecutor General’s Office and Central Military Prosecutor's Office, as well as by the RA Prosecutor Offices, was established by the order No 121 of the RA Prosecutor General dated December 27, 2013. The aim of establishing the sample form of the said report is to ensure the integrity of the presented statistical report on the activities performed by the structural subdivisions of the RA Prosecutor General’s Office and the Prosecutor’s Offices of the RA Prosecutor’s Office regarding their authorities and responsibilities. Clear standards on the presented information about the performed work are listed in it, including information about the quantity and complexity of the cases that prosecutors undertake procedural lead and prosecutorial supervision, about the quantity of the instructions given by them, terms of investigating the cases, the amount of damages identified in the cases, the quantity of their recovery, the cases brought before the court, the verdicts arrived at according to them, appeals, applications implemented, etc. The said information is given on the annual basis and is compared to the previous period of time in order to make a comparative analysis of the growth or reduction of the performed work, to find out the reasons and obstacles and to take measures to eliminate them.               

In order to find out the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors or Prosecutor’s Offices some standards listed in the sample form of the report may be carried out individually, for a shorter period of time, with certain questions and to find out certain problems by the Prosecutor General's recommendation.

4. Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Answer – The procedures for evaluation of the work of prosecutors are mentioned in the 1st and 3rd points of this questionnaire, at the same time during the description of each measure it was mentioned who performs the evaluation, how frequent and what consequences it has. All of them have an appellate procedure that works primarily in a superior then judicial manner.

5. As regards the fight against organized crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to facilitate or evaluate their work?

Answer – According to theArticle 190 the preliminary investigation of the offences provided for in articles 217 (terrorism) and 2171 (financing of terrorism) is conducted by National Security Service adjunct to the RA Government. The prosecutorial supervision over legality of the said cases is carried out by the prosecutors of the Department for Cases Investigated by National Security Bodies of the RA, connected with Illegal Turnover of Narcotic Drugs and Cybercrimes, who, if necessary, will embark on providing proper prosecutorial supervision over the investigation of criminal cases initiated on any incident of terrorism and financing of terrorism by using in practice the relevant skills, gained as a result of specialization.

The RA also continues the active interstate cooperation in the sphere of fight against terrorism. The RA Prosecutor’s Office Staff directly participates in meetings, conferences, discussions, training exercises, training courses and specialized seminars organized in the sphere of fight against terrorism.       

6. Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organized crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Answer – The main legislative act regulating the field - Law of the RA Against Laundering of Illicit Proceeds and Terrorism Financing was adopted by the National Assembly of the RA on May 26 of 2008. The Republic of Armenia also joined the 1990 Strasbourg Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds From Crime (ratified by the NA of the RA on 08.10.2003) and 2005 Warsaw Convention on Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and on the Financing of Terrorism (ratified by the NA of the RA on 18.03.2008). The RA also ratified the 1999 UN Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, the Financial Action Task Force (hereinafter FAFT) 40 Recommendations on Money Laundering and 8 SpecialRecommendations on Terrorist Financing, UN Security Council Counter-Terrorism Resolutions. The Law of the Republic of Armenia on the Fight Against Terrorism was adopted by the National Assembly of the RA on March 22 of 2005.           In accordance with generally accepted international standards corpus delicti of legalization of illegally obtained property (money laundering), terrorism, financing of terrorism, terrorism act against a foreign state or an international representative and  internationalterrorism are envisaged in Criminal code of the Republic of Armenia.

We assess the above-mentioned legislative developments and reforms as positive.   

7. Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organizations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organized crime and terrorism?

   Answer – We think that current international conventions, as well as international organizations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organized crime and terrorism.  

8. What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organized crime and terrorism?

Answer –The current policy that is being implemented in order to ensure the national security of the Republic of Armenia, in our opinion is quite efficient for fighting against terrorism.  


Azerbaijan / Azerbaïdjan

1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

In Azerbaijan, improvement of the activities of the prosecution authorities, ensuring the quality of the work of prosecutors are carried out in accordance with relevant state documents defining the prospects for the country's development. Thus, numerous activities carried out in connection with the execution of the "State Program on improvement of activity of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Azerbaijan for 2009-2011" approved by the Order of the President of the Republic of Azerbaijan dated September 27, 2008:

·         has increased the role of prosecutors in the development of the legal system and the civil society;

·         facilitated the widespread use of modern scientific and technological achievements in the work of the prosecutor's office, and in creation of a centralized information and communication system;

·         improved the professional level of ensuring the protection of the public prosecution;

·         strengthened social protection and improved logistics of employees of the prosecutor's office; and

·         upgraded the  quality of activities of the prosecution authorities to a new level, which meets modern requirements and the highest international standards.

Under the Presidential Decree No.800 dated December 29, 2012 the Concept of Development "Azerbaijan 2020: future vision" was approved. The main strategic goal of the Concept considering existing capabilities and resources is to provide in Azerbaijan sutainable economic growth and high social welfare, good governance and the rule of law, ensuring human rights and freedoms, as well as to achieve the level of development characterized by an active civil society status in the social life of the country. This Concept, which encompasses a major strategic development policy in public institutions, including the Prosecutor's Office, is of special significance in determining the directions of improvement of work of the prosecution bodies. In line with the strategic objectives of the development policy established under the Concept of Development the following has been ensured:

§  implementation of measures to ensure compliance of prosecutors’ activity to modern requirements;

§  guiding by the principles of transparency and clarity in their activities;

§  strengthening measures to combat corruption;

§  ensuring the application of information and communication technologies,

§  implementation of secure exchange of information with the relevant state bodies based on a unified infrastructure,

§  expanding the competence of the population to contact the prosecutor's office using electronic means.   

While ensuring the quality of prosecutors’ activity, prosecutor's offices in accordance with the principles of the rule of law implemented in the country, are guided by a strategy aimed at:

Ø  preserving and enforcement of the rule of law;

Ø  strengthening the fight against crime;

Ø  effective protection of human rights and freedoms;

Ø  timely implementation of the necessary measures to prevent violations of human rights and freedoms; and

Ø  restoration of violated rights and freedoms.

This strategy in accordance with the Constitution and other laws of the country is carried out in the following way:

ü  through initiation of criminal cases and investigation by prosecutors;

ü  taking charge of procedural aspects of the investigation and compliance with laws;

ü  supervision over the execution and enforcement of laws in inquiry and operational-search activity;

ü  bringing an action before the courts;

ü  participation as a plaintiff in civil and economic proceedings;

ü  participation as a party in the criminal proceedings before the courts and protection of public prosecution;

ü  bringing a protest against court decisions;

ü  facilitating the achievement of the purposes of punishment appointed by the courts.

Ensuring the quality of work of prosecutors is enshrined in the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan "On Prosecutor's Office". Thus, the Law, under which the basic principles of activity of the prosecutor's office are determined, has laid the foundation for the qualitative work. These principles are:

- equality before the law;

- respect and observance of the rights and freedoms of natural persons and legal entities;

- objectivity, impartiality and the basis on facts;

- unity and centralization;

- subordination of territorial and specialized prosecutors to the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Azerbaijan; and

- the political neutrality.

In addition, the above-mentioned law covers the system of the prosecutor's office, its organization and scope of activities.

2. Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please, briefly describe.

High quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors along with the criteria of equality before the law, observance and respect of the rights and freedoms of natural persons and legal entities, objectivity, impartiality and basis on the facts, unity and centralization, subordination of territorial and specialized prosecutors to the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Azerbaijan, the political neutrality is ensured though inadmissibility of impact, threats, unlawful interference, disrespect, and either direct or indirect restrictions by any person to the legitimate activities of prosecutors, as well as through financing the prosecutor’s offices, implementation of capital repairs and other maintenance issues out of the state budget.

At the same time in connection with this issue the appropriate legal framework has been created, and activities for employment on the basis of the principles of transparency and training of young and professional staff are carried out. Prosecutors in their activities are guided only by the laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan and international agreements, which the state is a party to. High material support, stipulated in the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan "On Service in the Prosecutor's Office", is worth to be noted as the warranty of the independence of prosecutors,

In order to ensure high quality and efficiency in the work of prosecutors, along with the appropriate measures comprehensive warranties are provided. Particular attention is given to criteria such as independence, impartiality, human resource development, economic security and working conditions, which play a significant role in ensuring high quality and efficiency in the activities of prosecutors.

According to the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan "On Prosecutor's Office" dated December 7, 1999, prosecution authorities act as a new public institution, which serves to ensuring human rights and freedoms. Prosecution authorities guided by the rule of law, political neutrality, objectivity, impartiality, basis on facts and other democratic principles, embrace properties inherent of such bodies in developed countries, as well as meet the contemporary high international standards. Today, as a result of modern reforms carried out at the state level, Prosecutor's Office of Azerbaijan has turned into a civilian public institution, having the advanced legal framework, and operating on the basis of democratic principles and practices. Prosecution authorities in their activities are guided by the principles of equality of rights before the law, observance and respect of the rights and freedoms of natural persons and legal entities, objectivity, impartiality and bases on the facts, unity and centralization, subordination of territorial and specialized prosecutors to the Prosecutor General of the Republic Azerbaijan, and the political neutrality.

3. Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered, etc.? Please, briefly describe.

With the purpose of assessing the activity of prosecutors the following official indicators are used: work done in the field of performing  their duties assigned by the law, including the number and reasonableness of the criminal cases, compliance with the terms of the preliminary investigation, the number of cases referred to the courts with the indictment, presence of acquitted persons among those brought  to justice, ensuring the rights of participants in a criminal case during the investigation, as well as ensuring the rights of defense, measures undertaken to redress infringed rights and reimburse material damages, etc. 

4. Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

There is a relevant formal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors. Evaluation is carried out by a senior prosecutor at the beginning of the next year, considering the activities carried out during the year, in accordance with the "Rules for evaluation of activity of prosecutors" approved by the relevant order of the Prosecutor General of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

Prosecutors for the protection of their rights and freedoms are entitled to appeal to the court, and have the right to a formal protest against the results of the evaluation as well.

Heads of structural divisions of the Prosecutor General's Office of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Director of the Anti-Corruption General Directorate with the Prosecutor General, Military Prosecutor of the Republic of Azerbaijan, Prosecutor of Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Military Prosecutor of Nakhchivan Autonomous Republic, Baku city Prosecutor, district (city) and territorial military prosecutors carry out evaluation of the work of the relevant prosecutors. In accordance with these rules, the assessed employees may officially report about their opinions in connection with the evaluation (its results).

According to article 2.3 of the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan "On public service", citizens of the Republic of Azerbaijan have right to be admitted to the public service through transparent competition, based on evaluation of public servants, as well as other principles. Public service of employees of prosecution authorities is regulated by other laws of the Republic of Azerbaijan. Service in these bodies is a special kind of public service. This provision is also envisaged in Article 2.2 of the Law "On service in the Prosecutor's Office" in the part relating to the prosecution authorities.

According to Article 2.3 of the Law "On public service", as well as Articles 2.2 and 14.1 of the Law "On service in the prosecutor's office", evaluation of the work of prosecutors is carried out in the manner prescribed by the Law of the Republic of Azerbaijan "On public service". In accordance with Article 30-1 of this Law "Rules for evaluation of the work of prosecutors" were approved by the order of the Prosecutor General dated 6 May 2015. According to the part "Organization of the evaluation", at the end of the year the period of activity of a prosecutor from January 1 to December 31 of the calendar year is evaluated by the head, who he is subordinated to. Evaluation of the service activity of employees is carried out by his direct supervisor subject to respective subordination. Annual evaluation of employees’ activity begins no later than December 1 of the current year and finishes on January 10 of the next year.

            Paragraph 28.4 of the "Rights and responsibilities on the evaluation of a service activity" of the "Rules for evaluation of the work ofprosecutors" is dedicated to the rights and obligations of employees. According to subparagraph 28.4.5 of this paragraph, if an employee does not agree with the result of the evaluation, he shall apply in  writing in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 27 of these rules. In paragraph 27 it is established that in case of differences of opinion between the employee and the head, the employee in this regard may refer to the responsible person in charge of the supervision of the head or the HR Department. The employee, who does not agree with the results of the evaluation, may offer re-evaluation, on the basis of what a repeated evaluation may be conducted. The employee, in case of disagreement with the final decision, may submit a complaint to the Prosecutor General within 5 days. The complaint shall be considered within 7 days. The Prosecutor General on the basis of the examination of the complaint shall take a decision either to maintain it in force or to annul the results of the evaluation and carry out a re-evaluation. The employee in the manner prescribed by law may appeal the decision of the Prosecutor General.

5. As regards the fight against organized crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

- facilitate their work?

- evaluate their work?

In Azerbaijan separate units of the Prosecutor General's Office have specialized in the field of fighting organized crime and terrorism, which in turn facilitates the work of prosecutors on the mentioned fields. While evaluating the work of prosecutors specialized in the fight against organized crime and terrorism, this fact is being particularly considered.

6. Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organized crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please, briefly describe.

In order to increase the efficiency of the fight against organized crime and terrorism legislative reforms are regularly carried out. These reforms have a positive impact on the quality and efficiency of the activities of prosecutors. Advanced legislative acts in this area are as follows:

§  Law on "On the Prevention of the Legalization of Criminally Obtained Funds or Other Property and the Financing of Terrorism" dated 10.02.2009;

§  Law on “On Combating Terrorism" dated 18.06.1999.

At the same time, terrorism, financing of terrorism, including all forms of organized crime have been reflected and have been criminalized in the Criminal Code of the Republic of Azerbaijan.

7. Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organizations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organized crime and terrorism?

The current international conventions, as well as international organizations like Eurojust and Interpol are considered sufficient.

8. What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organized crime and terrorism?

One of the main directions of the activity of the Prosecutor's Office is to take charge of procedural aspects of the preliminary investigation. The major issue in ensuring the efficiency and quality of prosecutors’ activity in fighting against crime and terrorism is to provide a comprehensive, complete and objective investigation of the criminal cases, based on international experience and cooperation, as well as to ensure peace and security of mankind, human rights and freedoms.

Under the Presidential Decree "On measures to strengthen the fight against crime, enforce the rule of law and public order" dated August 9, 1994, main responsibilities of the Ministry of Internal Affairs and other governmental bodies on the implementation of the operational-search activity for the prevention of cases of bribery and corruption, as well as crimes against the security of the economic and political basics of the state, including life, health and civil rights of citizens, primarily committed by organized criminal groups, illegal armed groups, have been determined. With the establishment of the Main Directorate for Combating Organized Crime within the Ministry, the fight against the most dangerous forms of crime is conducted based on the new organizational principles. 


Bosnia and Herzegovina / Bosnie et Herzégovine

1.   Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

On July, 8th 2015 the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegovina has published a resolution with the title „Strategy of Bosnia and Herzegovina for prevention in the fight against terrorism“. On the base of that resolution the Council of Ministers has founded a body of experts ( task force) for supervision of the progress of realisation and putting its resolution into action. A similar resolution with regard to the fight against the organized crime does not exist so far.

2.   Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc. ? Please briefly describe.

The most crucial criteria in my opinion are the human and material ressources of the prosecutoral institutions and the independency of the prosecutors work of politics and the ongoing tendency of the media to involve the prosecutors in their critical reports or often sensational desription of the facts. Disclosing the identity of the prosecutors in the media is not rarely a burden for the responsable prosecutor. Another important criteria is the quality of the prosecutor's work depending on his professional experience and as well practiacal as procedural education.

3.   Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of the prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration,, the complexity of cases considered etc. ? Please briefly describe.

Indeed the same indicators mentioned in the obove raised questions are used to assess the quality and efficiency of the prosecutors. The length of consideration on a case strongly depends on its political infliction,what seems to be tipical for smaller countries with close ties between the interest of business and politicians. The most complex cases are those which afford time gaining economical opinion of an expert witness or a long lasting international cooperation to collect all evidence against an organized criminal group and the individual part of blame of its members.Of course the assessment of the quality of prosecutor's work takes into account this complexity of cases.

4.   Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what concequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Each prosecutor has to prepare a mothly report to the head of the prosecutorial office in question (not to forget that there exist three levels of prosecution in Bosnia and Herzegowina). The monthly reports are to be considered again in the end of the year when on the level of the Head of Office a final evaluation of prosecutor's work as a whole take place. The final annual assessement is sent to the High Judical and Prosecutoral Council which is the responsible body for any appeal or recomendation of a single prosecutor too.

5.   As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to

– facilitate their work?

- evaluate their work?

The exclusive jurisdiction over cases of organized crime and terrorism is in the hand of the Prosecutor's Office of Bosnia and Herzegowina and its Supreme Court which delegate it to their specified sections. To facilitate the work of the specified prosecutorial section it is assisted for example by tecnical specialist for the investigation. The evaluation of prosecutor's work in this section is the same as above mentioned for all prosecutors. In addition the body of experts depending of the Council of Ministers of Bosnia and Herzegowina has to evaluate the work on the field of terrorism annually and hand over the report to the responsable parlamentary committee.

6.   Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organized crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

The last fundamental reforms of the law on crime (criminal code of Bosnia and Herzegowina) passed the parliament in the year 2015. The new legislation contain in addition to sanctions against terrorism itself as well the abstract of record „fanancing of terroristic operations“ as „public standing up for terroristic actions“ and „recruitment for terroristic activities“ and in addition „training for terroristic activities“. The notification of these new abstract  records fill a loophole of law and therefore facilitate the prosecuting of terroristic cases.

7.   Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like EUROJUST, EUROPOL and INTERPOL, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Whereas the cooperation with INTERPOL seems to be sufficiently effective, unfortunately there is not at all any direct cooperation with EUROJUST and EUROPOL because  Bosnia and Herzegowina is not a memberstate of EU.

8.   What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

There are three major challenges with regard to the improvement of quality and efficiency of prosecutor's work:

-       the improvement of education as an ongoing process of specialisation of the matter,

-       the adaption of the legislation with special regard to the improvement of tecnical abilities of organized criminals as well as international operating terrorists,

-       strong educational improvement and modernisation of

 „State Investigation and Protection Agency“ (SIPA) of Bosnia and Herzegowina as the main assisting body of the State's Prosecutors Office in all affairs concerning terrorism and organised crime.

                

Bulgaria / Bulgarie

1.              Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Every year by 30 April the Prosecutor General submits to the Supreme Judicial Council a Report on the application of the Law and on the activities of the Prosecution Office and the investigating bodies. The report is to be adopted by the SJC and presented in the Parliament.

It includes analysis of various activities of the PO, evaluation (as well of the work on specific types of crimes) measures, proposals and strategic priorities. This influences the focus of the work for the next period.

For example: After setting the priority on the organised crime and corruption  the appellate prosecutors and the head of the specialized appellate prosecution office shall provide the Prosecutor General with summarized information on the investigations of the relevant district. In those reports similar analysis on the work of prosecutors is carried out and findings about the identified problems and possible solutions are exposed

The Supreme Cassation Prosecution analyses and summarizes the important practice of courts and prosecutors' offices, prepares and drafts methodological guidelines and instructions. After their approval by the Prosecutor General they are made available for all prosecutors.

Based on the needs the PO develops every year an internal training program – in addition to training program of the National Institute of Justice.

2.              Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Independence and impartiality and on the other hand - high level of expertise. accountability  of the prosecutors and  predictability of their decisions  are seen as criteria to guarantee the quality of the performance of the PO.

The personnel in the Prosecutor's Office of the Republic of Bulgaria are sufficient. In part of the prosecutor's offices the material working conditions require some improvement.

3.              Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

Cases are  distributed inside judicial bodies on the basis of the random selection principle through electronic assignment following the sequence of their intake. Additionally, the Supreme Judicial Council approved in 2014 Rules for measuring the workload of prosecutors' offices and individual workload of prosecutors and investigators were approved. They are based on the time factor for the consideration of the acts, and bonification system, depending on the complexity of case.

4.              Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

The evaluation of the work of individual prosecutors is carried out through their appraisal by the Supreme Judicial Council. The appraisal procedure is carried out for the purpose of acquiring tenure and periodically - every four years after a previous appraisal, until completion of 60 years of age. It is conducted on the basis of the prescribed in the law criteria and indicators by a special commission, which supports the SJC. The conclusion of the commission can be objected. On the basis of the appraisal an aggregate assessment is adopted by the Supreme Judicial Council.

The Law envisages possibility for assessment of the work of the prosecutors by the Inspectorate at the Supreme Judicial Council. It is authorized to check the arrangements made for the institution and progress of prosecution and investigation case files, the disposal thereof within the established time limits, as well as to analyze and summarize the cases assigned to the prosecutors. In case of violations in the discharge of the powers, the Inspectorate is entitled to alert the administrative head of the PO and the Supreme Judicial Council and to propose the imposition of disciplinary sanctions.

5.              As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

With an amendment to the Criminal Procedure Code in 2011 Specialized Criminal Court, respectively Specialized Prosecutor's Office was set up, assigned to hear cases of crimes, committed by organized criminal groups, and specifically mentioned crimes, committed by persons, associated with such groups. With new amendments to the same Code in 2015, these Court, respectively the Specialized Prosecutor's Office, were assigned to deal with all cases related to terrorism and financing of terrorism. 

The investigations of the cases falling within the jurisdiction of the Specialized Criminal Court are carried out by investigators in the investigation department of the Specialized Prosecutor's Office; investigating officers appointed by an order of the Minister of Interior and investigating customs inspectors appointed by an order of the Minister of Finance, upon the proposal of the director of the Customs Agency.

The above mentioned Rules for measuring the workload of prosecutors' offices and individual workload of prosecutors and investigatorswere approved[1] are applicable for the prosecutors and foe the investigating magistrates in the Specialized Prosecutor's Office.

6.              Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

The involvement of the Specialized Prosecutor's Office and the Specialized Criminal Court in the cases of terrorism in 2015 is presented in p.5 above.

In 2015 additional  provisions in the Penal Code relating to terrorism  were implemented, including criminalization of border crossing with the purpose  to participate in the commission of a terrorist activity.

7.              Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

The international conventions are considered as a crucial factor for amending and harmonizing the Bulgarian national penal and other legislation with in the field of combating the organized crime and terrorism. The organizations like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol support the work of prosecutors, and providecontribution to a betterefficiency in the fight against organized crime and terrorism. One of the biggest advantages, ensured by those odganisations is  the direct contact between prosecutorsand agents from various  countries, when such communication is necessary.

8.              What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

- Unmodern penal legislation;

- The use of continuously developing technological tools in the preparation and commission of the offenses, respectively for communication between  crime-involved persons;

 - Untimely (in some cases) execution of the requests for legal assistance;

 - Migrant flow and its relationship with organized crime.

ЗАКОН ЗА СЪДЕБНАТА ВЛАСТ

Чл. 2. Органите на съдебната власт се ръководят от Конституцията и от принципите, установени в този закон.

Чл. 3. При постановяване на своите актове съдиите, прокурорите и следователите се основават на закона и на събраните по делото доказателства.

Чл. 4. Органите на съдебната власт изпълняват функциите си безпристрастно.

Чл. 5. (1) Гражданите и юридическите лица имат право на информация за работата на съдебната власт.

(2) Органите на съдебната власт са длъжни да осигуряват откритост, достъпност и прозрачност на действията си по реда на този закон и на процесуалните закони.

(3) Органите на съдебната власт осъществяват взаимодействие с органите на законодателната и изпълнителната власт за всестранна и пълна защита правата на гражданите и юридическите лица и реализиране на наказателната политика на държавата.

Чл. 6. При осъществяване на дейността си съдиите, прокурорите и следователите са политически неутрални.

Чл. 7. (1) Всеки има право на справедлив и публичен процес в разумен срок и от независим и безпристрастен съд.

(2) Гражданите и юридическите лица имат право на съдебна защита, която не може да им бъде отказана.

(3) При условия и по ред, определени със закон, гражданите могат да получат правна помощ, която се финансира от държавата.

Чл. 8. (1) Органите на съдебната власт прилагат законите точно и еднакво спрямо всички лица и случаи, за които се отнасят.

(2) При осъществяване на функциите на съдебната власт, както и при заемане на длъжности в органите на съдебната власт, не се допускат никакви ограничения на правата или привилегии, основани на раса, народност, етническа принадлежност, пол, произход, религия, образование, убеждения, политическа принадлежност, лично и обществено положение или имуществено състояние.

Чл. 9. (1) Разпределението на делата и преписките в органите на съдебната власт се извършва на принципа на случайния подбор чрез електронно разпределение съобразно поредността на постъпването им.

(2) (Доп. - ДВ, бр. 109 от 2008 г., изм., бр. 1 от 2011 г., в сила от 4.01.2011 г.) Принципът на случайния подбор при разпределението на делата в съдилищата се прилага в рамките на колегиите или отделенията, а в прокуратурата и Националната следствена служба - в рамките на отделите.

ЧЛ. 30 ВСС:

9. (изм. - ДВ, бр. 1 от 2011 г., в сила от 4.01.2011 г.)apis://desktop/icons/kwadrat.gif ежегодно анализира и отчита степента на натовареност на органите на съдебната власт;

10. (доп. - ДВ, бр. 1 от 2011 г., в сила от 4.01.2011 г., изм., бр. 32 от 2011 г., в сила от 19.04.2011 г.)apis://desktop/icons/kwadrat.gif извършва атестиране на съдиите, прокурорите, следователите, на административните ръководители и техните заместници в предвидените от закона случаи съобразно критерии, определени с наредбата по чл. 209а;

11. води и съхранява кадровите дела на съдиите, прокурорите и следователите;

12. (изм. - ДВ, бр. 33 от 2009 г., бр. 1 от 2011 г., в сила от 4.01.2011 г.)apis://desktop/icons/kwadrat.gif одобрява Кодекс за етично поведение на българските магистрати и Етичен кодекс на съдебните служители;

13. (изм. - ДВ, бр. 33 от 2009 г.)apis://desktop/icons/kwadrat.gif изисква и обобщава на всеки 6 месеца информация от съдилищата, прокуратурата и от Националната следствена служба за тяхната дейност;

14. изготвя и внася в Народното събрание до 31 май обобщен годишен доклад за своята дейност и дейността на Инспектората към Висшия съдебен съвет, както и годишните доклади на Върховния касационен съд, на Върховния административен съд и на главния прокурор;

Чл. 54. (1) Инспекторатът:

1. проверява организацията на административната дейност на съдилищата, прокуратурите и следствените органи;

2. проверява организацията по образуването и движението на съдебните, прокурорските и следствените дела, както и приключването на делата в установените срокове;

3. анализира и обобщава делата, които са приключени с влязъл в сила съдебен акт, както и приключените преписки и дела на прокурорите и следователите;

4. при противоречива съдебна практика, установена при осъществяване на дейността по т. 3, сигнализира компетентните органи за отправяне на искане за приемане на тълкувателни решения или тълкувателни постановления;

5. при нарушения, установени при осъществяване на дейностите по т. 1 - 3, сигнализира административния ръководител на съответния орган на съдебната власт и Висшия съдебен съвет;

6. прави предложения за налагане на дисциплинарни наказания на съдии, прокурори, следователи и административни ръководители на органите на съдебната власт;

Чл. 244. (Изм. - ДВ, бр. 33 от 2009 г., бр. 1 от 2011 г., в сила от 4.01.2011 г.) В съдилищата и в прокуратурите по преценка на Висшия съдебен съвет въз основа на степента на натовареност на съответния орган на съдебната власт може да има съдебни помощници и прокурорски помощници.

Чл. 245. (1) За съдебен и прокурорски помощник се назначава лице, което отговаря на изискванията по чл. 162 и е издържало конкурс за съдебен служител.

(2) Кандидатите се назначават по реда на класирането им от конкурсната комисия.

Чл. 246. (1) Съдебните помощници се назначават от административния ръководител на съответния съд.

(2) Прокурорските помощници се назначават от главния прокурор или административния ръководител на съответната прокуратура.

Чл. 246а. (Нов - ДВ, бр. 1 от 2011 г., в сила от 4.01.2011 г.) (1) Съдебните помощници подпомагат съдиите при изпълнението на техните функции. Съдебните помощници изпълняват и други задачи, възложени им от председателя на съда, от неговите заместници, от председателите на отделения или от други съдии.

(2) Прокурорските помощници подпомагат прокурорите при изпълнението на техните функции. Прокурорските помощници изпълняват и други задачи, възложени им от съответния административен ръководител или от неговите заместници.

Чл. 249. (1) Националният институт на правосъдието осъществява:

1. (изм. - ДВ, бр. 32 от 2011 г., в сила от 1.01.2012 г.)apis://desktop/icons/kwadrat.gif задължително първоначално обучение на кандидатите за младши съдия и младши прокурор;

2. (доп. - ДВ, бр. 33 от 2009 г.)apis://desktop/icons/kwadrat.gif поддържането и повишаването на квалификацията на съдиите, прокурорите и следователите, на държавните съдебни изпълнители, съдиите по вписванията, съдебните помощници, прокурорските помощници, съдебните служители, на инспекторите от Инспектората към министъра на правосъдието и на други служители от Министерството на правосъдието.

(2) Към Националния институт на правосъдието има учебно-информационен център, който организира дистанционно обучение и извършва проучване и изследване на съдебната практика, включително на практиката по администриране на правораздаването, за нуждите на обучението.

Чл. 261. Висшият съдебен съвет може да реши определени курсове да са задължителни за съдиите, прокурорите, следователите и съдебните служители в случаите на:

1. повишаване в длъжност;

2. назначаване за административен ръководител;

3. специализация.


Croatia / Croatie

            1.         Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

1. Quality of work of state attorneys/prosecutors and deputy state attorneys/prosecutors is primarily ensured through duty of state attorneys and deputy state attorneys to continuously undergo professional training and participate in educational programmes of the Judicial Academy. They can also participate in other forms of education and professional training. Further on, state attorney or deputy state attorney can published academic papers, participate in the capacity of a lecturer in Judicial Academy, and as a teacher or associate participate in university or professional studies, participate in expert or scientific conferences, draft regulations or participate in other similar activities and receive a fee for above referenced work.

Also, establishment of departments and sections in the state attorney’s office guarantees a specialisation in work and consequentially results in enhanced efficiency and quality of work. Therefore, in state attorney’s offices a criminal-law department is established for criminal cases and civil-and-administrative law department is established for civil and administrative cases. State Attorney General can establish an investigative department for a territory of county or municipal state attorney’s office and for the territory of one or more county state attorney’s offices; State Attorney General shall establish a Financial Investigations Department.

Section as expert bodies can be stablished within the departments consisting of no less than three deputies specialised for a specific type of cases. Therefore, sections for general crime, blood crime, economic crime and juvenile delinquency can be established within criminal law department. County state attorney’s offices can establish sections for first instance and also second-instance cases.

Moreover, quality of work is ensured through sessions of the collegiate body of the state attorney’s office with the aim of successful performance of tasks within the scope of state attorney’s office, obtaining an opinion on the task schedule, harmonisation of work of certain departments and sections, advancement of work methods, professional development and other issues important for the work of the state attorney’s office. Collegiate body particularly considers the following issues: organization of the internal operations of the State Attorney's Office and schedule tasks, realization of the program of work of the State Attorney's Office and a report on the work, controversial legal issues and mandatory instructions of senior state attorney’s office, legal opinions of lower and higher courts, the application of new regulations, professional training of officials, advisers, trainees and other employees as well as other issues important for the work of the State Attorney's Office. Certain issues can be considered in department or section sessions.

Also, it is important to emphasize that the State Attorney General of the Republic of Croatia can convene an extended Collegiate Body of the State Attorney’s Office of the Republic of Croatia which consists of all Deputies of the State Attorney General, County State Attorneys and heads of special State Attorney’s Offices. The extended Collegiate Body considers draft legislation when these determine the powers of State Attorney’s Office or regulate other issues relevant for the work of State Attorney’s Office or other state attorney duties.

County State Attorney can convene an extended collegiate body consisting of the County State Attorney and his/her deputies and Municipal State attorneys, and if the number of deputies is low, deputy municipal state attorneys can be included.  This collegiate body considers instructions and reports of the senior state attorney’s office and other issues important for the work of state attorney’s office or performance of state attorney’ duties in the territory of the county state attorney’s office.

With the aim of improving the quality of work and efficiency of the entire state attorney’s organisation, it is important to pint out the institute of supervision over work and review of lower state attorney’s offices.

State Attorney’s Office of the Republic of Croatian in performing surveillance of operations of State Attorney’s Offices must take corresponding measures and especially perform direct inspections of the entire work and business operations of each State Attorney’s Office, while county state attorney’s office, as a senior state attorney’s office supervises work of municipal state attorney’s office in their territory. In conducting supervision, county state attorney’s office obtains reports and other data on the work of lower ranking state attorney’s offices and preforms direct inspection of work of every official, and it can convene joint meetings and consultations with state attorneys, deputy state attorneys, advisors, trainees and other employees from lower ranking state attorney’s offices so as to consider issues of general significance for the work of the lower ranking state attorney’s office.

State Attorney General of the Republic of Croatia in accordance with the work program, personally or via his/her deputies he/she designates and other experts, every two years performs inspection of entire operations or certain parts of operations of county state attorney’s offices. In the course of the inspection, complete or partial inspections of municipal state attorney’s offices in the territory of a county state attorney’s office can be performed. Inspections of certain municipal state attorney’s offices can be conducted separately.

County State Attorney acts in the same manner, once in two years he/she performs inspections of entire operations or certain parts of operations of lower ranking state attorney’s offices from his/her territory. Report on the inspection, state of affairs and conducted measures is delivered to the state attorney’s office that was the subject of the inspection and to the State Attorney’s Office of the Republic of Croatia.

Also, every state attorney, deputy state attorney and advisor is the subject of inspection when he/she applies for the transfer or appointment to the position of the state attorney or deputy state attorney in a different state attorney’s office. The inspection refers to the two-year period prior to applying to the transfer or appointment.

It is important to emphasize that Expert Meeting of the State Attorney’s Office of the Republic of Croatia is held annually where issues important for the work of state attorney’s organisation are discussed and current problems in work and actions of state attorney’s offices are presented.

2.  Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

2. In securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of the state attorney’s office in the Republic of Croatia the crucial elements are independence, impartiality and autonomy of state attorneys.  Namely, pursuant to the Constitution of the Republic of Croatia and provisions of the State Attorney’s Office Act ("Official Gazette” no. 76/09, 153/09, 116/10, 145/10, 57/11, 130/11, 72/13, 148/13, 33/15 and 82/15, hereinafter: ZDO/09) state attorney’s office is and independent and autonomous judicial authority empowered and duty-bound to instigate prosecution of perpetrators of criminal and other penal offences, to initiate legal measures to protect the property of the Republic of Croatia and to apply legal remedies to protect the Constitution and law. State Attorney’s Office executes its authority pursuant to the Constitution, laws, international treaties that constitute part of the legal system of the Republic of Croatia, and other provisions adopted pursuant to the Constitution, a treaty and law of the Republic of Croatia. Also, it is important to emphasize that the referenced act prescribes that every form of influence, especially any form of coercion towards State Attorneys, abuse of public authority and personal influence, and the use of media and public statement in view of criminal cases for which proceedings are instituted ex officio, as well in view of the cases in which the State Attorney performs his/her rights and duties legally in view of protecting the assets of the Republic of Croatia, is prohibited. Further on State Attorney General of the Republic of Croatia, State Attorney and Deputy State Attorney General or the Deputy State Attorney shall not be held liable for legal opinion issued in view of the case assigned to him/her, unless in case of statutory infringement from the part of the State Attorney General, the State Attorney or the Deputy State Attorney, which constitute a criminal offence. It needs to be pointed out that State Attorney or Deputy State Attorney is not allowed to use his/her official position or reputation of the State Attorney Office for realization of his/her rights before state bodies and bodies of local self-government and local administration. Also, State Attorney or Deputy State Attorney must not perform duties of a judge, lawyer, public notary or a member of the management or supervisory committee of a commercial company or any other legal person gaining profit and must not perform any other service or work that might influence his/her autonomy and objectivity or harm his/her public reputation or that is, otherwise, not connected to performance of state attorney duties.

Impartiality of deputy state attorneys is also ensured by electronic random assignment of cases through CTS system. It also ensures equal workload of deputies.

Moreover, special form of protection of judicial officials, thus including state attorney is reflected in the existence of a criminal offence of coercion against judicial official referred to in article 312 of the Criminal Code ("Official Gazette", no: 125/11, 144/12, 56/15 i 61/15, hereinafter: KZ/11).  Therefore, whoever by the use of force or threat of any kind of harm prevents a judge, state attorney, notary public or other judicial official or employee from taking an action or decision within the limits of his/her authority or coerces him/her to take an action or decision within or beyond the limits of his/her authority shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of between six months and five years.

  Also, it is important to mention existence of the criminal offence of coercion against the most senior state officials of the Republic of Croatia referred to in Article 346 of KZ/11, and State Attorney General of the Republic of Croatia is one of them. Therefore, whoever, in cases not falling under Article 97 of the Act, by the use of force or threat of immediate use of force prevents the State Attorney General of the Republic of Croatia from performing his/her duties or forces him/her to perform his/her duties in a certain manner shall be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of between one and eight years. Even stricter sentence is envisaged for this criminal offence, i.e. imprisonment for a term of between three and twelve years if by this criminal offence the life or limb of the State Attorney General is endangered or he/she is inflicted a bodily injury, or if during the commission of the said offence weapons or other dangerous instruments are used.

3.  Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

3. Indicators of quality and efficiency of work of state attorneys are primarily reflected in state attorney's statistics and reports on work.

Therefore, state attorney's offices keep and deliver statistics of their work through different forms to the State Statistics Institute that keeps records in accordance with a special act. Statistical data are filled into special forms based on data from certain registries, and completed lists and regular statistical reports are delivered to competent authorities in prescribed deadlines.

Further on, State Attorney’s Office of the Republic of Croatia is due to submit a report to the Croatian Parliament until 30 April of current year. Report refers to the state and movement of reported crime in the previous year, cases which refer to the protection of property interests of the Republic of Croatia, legal issues in certain areas, review of the organisation and human resources. The report can warn of the conditions and functioning of the legal system, shortcomings in the legislation and internal operations of the state attorney’s office and provide suggestions for the advancement of work.

Also, state attorney’s offices submit monthly reports to the higher-ranking state attorney’s office. Report contains data on the proceedings that have finished, proceedings that are on-going and actions that have been undertaken or will be undertaken. Higher ranking state attorney’s office can request reports to be made per types of cases. State attorney’s office also submit annual reports to the higher ranking state attorney’s office that contain review of received, solved and unsolved cases, review of structure of criminal, civil and administrative cases, indictments and representations and also review of legal remedies that were filed and result thereof. State attorney’s offices can indicate difficulties they encounter in their work, deficiencies in the legislation, internal operations of the state attorney’s office or courts and deliver propositions for possible amendments.

State Attorney’s Office Act/09 also prescribes submitting special reports in cases of special national interests or with complex factual and legal issues, where a lower ranking State Attorney’s Office is obliged to report to a higher ranking State Attorney’s Office on performed as well as future measures. These reports are submitted immediately upon receiving a case or conducting an action. If the case in question is of special significance, State Attorney General is directly informed via telecommunication means.

Moreover, in regard to records on the work of state attorney’s offices and their deputies, it is important to point out that state attorney’s registry keeps a monthly specification sheet for every state attorney, deputy state attorney or advisor which contains a total number of received, solved and unsolved reports and cases, deadlines in which the cases were solved, type and number of conducted actions, court and administrative bodies’ decisions, number of trial days and hearings and number of legal remedies and decisions on those remedies, as well as data on education and other out-of-procedure actions. At the end of a calendar year, annual specification sheet is made for every state attorney, deputy state attorney or advisor, and a copy is enclosed to his/her personal file.

Also, special personal file is formed for every deputy state attorney in a state attorney’s office so as to keep records on his/her work, supervisions over his/her work and comments and praises over his/her work referenced data are collected for the purpose of monitoring and evaluation of work, and can be used for that purpose only.

It is important to point out that Internal Supervision Department has been established within the State Attorney’s Office of the Republic of Croatia for the purpose of supervising the work of state attorney’s offices, review of entire work of local state attorney’s offices, maintain monthly and annual statistics and care of professional development of state attorneys, deputy state attorneys, advisors, trainees and other employees.

4.  Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

4. In regard to evaluation of performance of state attorney’s duty, please note that deputy state attorney appointed for the first term to the state attorney’s office is evaluated each year for the first three years. Other deputies are evaluated every third year. Performance of duties of State Attorneys and Deputy State Attorneys is evaluated according to the diligence shown in resolving assigned cases in comparison to the average work results of the County, i.e. Municipal State Attorney’s Offices in the year preceding the year of evaluation, implementation of legal remedies,  professional competence and work results, quality of work, and rhetorical and writing skills, complying with procedural deadlines, ability and readiness to learn and acquire knew knowledge, active participation and achieved grades in professional training programmes, published academic papers, participation in practical legal courses, and attending conferences, cooperation and relationship with fellow workers;, ability to perform administrative work and the work of the state attorney, if assigned to that office.

Deputy State Attorney’s grade for performance of state attorney duties is given by the State Attorney of that State Attorney’s Office while the State Attorney ie evaluated by the higher ranking state attorney. Before delivery of evaluation, the State Attorney shall invite the State Attorney or Deputy State Attorney being evaluated and acquaint him/her with the grounds used for evaluation. The State Attorney or Deputy Attorney has the right to warn of the circumstances that might influence evaluation procedure and that the State Attorney has not taken into account or has reached wrong conclusion based thereon. Grade is delivered to the Deputy State Attorney to whom it refers and the content thereof is confidential. In explanation of the grade, the State Attorney shall explain the evaluation method pursuant to each criterion and indicators on the grounds of which the grade has been achieved, and shall state all relevant data. Grade is delivered with complaint instructions.County and Municipal State Attorney or Deputy State Attorney not agreeing with the grade has the right to file a complaint to the State Attorney's Council within eight days from the receipt thereof.If the complaint against the grade is filed, the State Attorney giving the grade shall demand the opinion of the Collegiate of the State Attorney’s Office in question. Then, s/he shall deliver the complaint together with the opinion of the Collegiate and the personal file of the Deputy to the State Attorney's Council who shall confirm, amend or return the grade for re-evaluation.

5. As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

5. As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, it is important to note that special state attorney’s office - the Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime (USKOK) is competent for the criminal offence of terrorism if it was committed within a criminal association. Namely, USKOK is a specialised state attorney’s office competent to act in cases of corruption and organised crime and it is competent for the entire territory of the Republic of Croatia with a seat in Zagreb and sections in Osijek, Rijeka and Split, due to large number of case.

To facilitate and enable higher quality and more timely work of USKOK, Police National Office for the Suppression of Corruption and Organised Crime (PNUSKOK) was established. It a special police office within the Crime Police Administration of the Chief Police Directorate that conducts criminal investigation and inquiries into criminal offences from USKOK’s competence. By this separate structure of PNUSKOK and USKOK, direct communication between deputies and police officers is ensured with the aim of more efficient fight against organised crime and corruption.  

6.  Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

6. By the latest amendments of the Criminal Code that entered into force on 21 May 2015, Article 103 of the referenced act was amended. Namely, along with prescribed punishability of preparatory actions for criminal offence of terrorism referred to in Article 97 of the Criminal Code, amendments prescribed punishability of preparatory actions for criminal offences of financing terrorism (Article 98), public incitement to terrorism (Article 99), recruitment for terrorism (Article 100), training for terrorism (Article 101) and terrorism association (Article 102).

Namely, the Republic of Croatia – party to all UN and other international anti-terrorist instruments harmonised its criminal legislation. This is especially true for the implementation of Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism (FD 2002) and Amending Framework Decision 2008/919/JHA (FD 2008) that are completely implemented into Croatian Criminal Code by incriminating offence of terrorism, financing terrorism, public incitement to terrorism, recruitment for terrorism, training for terrorism, terrorism association and preparation of criminal offences against values protected by international law, as criminal offences with corresponding and diverting sanctions. Criminal legislation of the Republic of Croatia, since it completely adopted or implemented current international legal acts in the field of terrorism, can adequately and efficiently provide a legal response to different forms of potential terrorist threats or activities. However, requirements of the Security Council Resolution UN 2178/14 (UNSCR 2178) regarding criminalisation of certain activities (travelling for the purpose of terrorism, financing of such travel, organisation or facilitation of such travel) surpasses frames of FD 2002 and FD 2008 and, consequently, framework of domestic implementation law. This Resolution required energetic measures against latest forms of terrorism and invited UN member states to „double efforts in combating violent extremism” (paragraph 15). This is the reason why above referenced amendments of the Criminal Code were introduced so as to criminalise preparatory actions not just for the offence of terrorism but also for the offences of financing terrorism, public incitement to terrorism, recruitment for terrorism, training for terrorism and terrorism association.  

7.  Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

                   7. Conventions are in any case necessary, as a starting point and basis for efficient cooperation. Of course, decisive factor is the implementation of conventions' provisions in everyday work.

            Experiences in cooperation via EUROJUST are very positive. Eurojust provides a possibility of quick and safe exchange of information, but also possibility of direct contact between concerned prosecutors from different states with the aim of reaching concrete decisions in cases (coordination meetings). Also, it provides a possibility of direct monitoring of certain activities through Coordination centres. The role of Eurojust should be strengthened, but also ensure the protection of sovereignty of member states through their actions via Eurojust.

8. What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

8. The major challenges as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of state attorney's office and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism, primarily is the existence of sufficient material resources and necessary increase in staffing all with the aim of enabling quick and efficient response to bigger and more serious challenges set before them as regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism. Namely, suppression of terrorism, a very complex criminal offence due to different, quickly changing forms and international element, has become one of the primary tasks of EU and UN member states. Therefore, additional efforts need to invested and improve quality of work in state attorney’s offices by increasing material and human resources to be able to respond to mentioned challenges successfully and expediently. 

Also, it is important to emphasize that one might expected that certain problems in obtaining evidence, material and personal, could appear in practice and which could confirm conducting preparatory actions for the perpetration of criminal offences of terrorism, and possible new forms of the criminal offence. In that view, we believe international cooperation mechanisms need to be strengthened further and enable direct and efficient exchange of information in international level.

 

Czech Republic / République tchèque

1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Yes, according to all the criteria which can be assessed it can be said that the prosecution service works strategically and effectively.

Art. 80/1 of the Czech Constitution characterises the public prosecution as a body which shall issue and argue public indictments in criminal proceedings; it shall perform other functions as well if a statute so provides.

 

Public prosecution is of a judicial nature but it does not perform a judicial power. However, its activities are of a similar nature like performance of a judicial power. 

Currently, the structure of public prosecution is identical with the structure of courts. There are 4 following tiers: district, regional, high public prosecutor's offices and the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office. 

The heads of particular prosecutor's offices determine the internal organisation of each public prosecutor's office and distribute the work among the prosecutors.

Public prosecution is based on the criteria of specialisations (e.g. corruption, terrorism, extremism, juvenile delinquency etc.). Each public prosecutor usually deals with work within his specialisation.

Public prosecutors as well as lower personnel waiting for the function attend specialised seminars in the Academy of Justice.

Evaluation of public prosecutors should also secure an effective performance of tasks which the public prosecution deals with (in detail see Q 3 and 4).

A recodification of the Act on Public Prosecution is being prepared. The Bill enshrines a modern concept of public prosecution which is capable of:

·         coping with new forms of crime (especially terrorism, cybernetic or in a broader aspect an informatic crime, serious economic, financial crime and tax crime, crime connected with corruption);

·         protecting the society from crime;

·         achieving socially beneficial goals in non-criminal matters where the public prosecution is replaceable only with difficulties or is not replaceable at all.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Impartiality, independence and human and material resources are considered crucial criteria in order to secure high standard of quality and efficiency. 

Public prosecution is an independent executive body from the constitutional point of view. However it is not independent in the same sense as the courts are (independence of public prosecution is of different kind than the judicial independence which is enshrined in the Constitution but in spite of this fact the independence is of an important value within the structure of public prosecution). Independence of the public prosecution is a necessary condition for its proper function. Public prosecution has to be independent from various political impacts and pressure which could influence its decision making process (especially while representing the public action in criminal procedure in court). This concept of public prosecution is common in all democratic countries.

An important aspect is also the independence of particular public prosecutors as persons who perform their statutory competences. Public prosecutor is one of the essential public servants who serves justice. Performance of the public prosecution tasks determines how the justice is served by courts. Any external interference which would endanger or violate the principle of independence and impartiality of public prosecutor poses a serious restriction of serving justice as well as an inadmissible violation of the rule of law. In this context we would like to refer to Art. 11 of the Council of Europe Recommendation Rec (2000) 19 on the role of public prosecution in the criminal justice system which states that states should take appropriate measures to ensure that public prosecutors are able to perform their professional duties and responsibilities without unjustified interference or unjustified exposure to civil, penal or other liability. The independence of public prosecutors is connected to their impartiality.    

Legal regulation generally states that a public prosecutor is obliged to fulfill responsibly his tasks and respect principles which the regulation provides (the public prosecutor is especially obliged to pursue his tasks conscientliously, responsibly, impartially, justly and without delays. Any interference or other impact which could result in violation of any of these principles must be denied).  

Other essential statutory public prosecution principles, apart from the mentioned principle of impartiality and independence, are as follows:

-       principle of legality – public prosecution has to act in accordance with the law

-       principle of rapidity and professionalism (principle of efficiency) – public prosecution has to deal with its tasks thoroughly and rapidly using adequate methods which fit best in indvidual cases while respecting human rights and basic freedoms

Human and material resources: A new systemization has been staretd in 2013 which should secure a balanced distribution of public prosecutors to particular public prosecutor's offices according to their workload. This way a fair systemization has been achieved which is based on workload of each public prosecutors office and enables to distribute human resources (public prosecutors and administrative staff) justly.

Securing the performance of statutory tasks is also dependent on a qualified adiministrative staff. 

 3.        Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

A formal quality and efficiency indicator of work of public prosecutors can be considered a system of regular evaluation which was introduced in the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office in January 2016. Gradually, this system should be introduced also in lower tiers of public prosecution. The Bill on public prosecution enshrines a regular and systematic evaluation of all public prosecutors (for details see Q 4). 

Statistics which are being elaborated every year by the police, public prosecution and courts are also considered an efficiency indicator of public prosecution. The statistics are primarily not determined to this goal, on the other hand the statistics have an informative value reffering to an average length of criminal procedure, number of indictments, number of acquittals and cases returned to the public prosecutor for more inquiries etc. These indicators say very essential things about the quality of work which prosecutors do.

Another thing to mention is a Report on the activities of public prosecution for the past year. The Supreme public prosecutor submits this Report through the Minister of Justice to the Government till the half of each year. The duty to elaborate the Report is regulated in the Act on Public Prosecution. The Report is a document which describes essential results of the activities of the public prosecution in preceding year. The Reports focus inter alia on the current state and developments of crime, rapidity of the pre-trial procedure since the procedure has been initiated, activities of the public prosecution where the defendant is in a pre-trial detention, cases returned to public prosecutor for more inquiries, court aquittals and non-criminal competences of public prosecution.  

 

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

There has been no regular evaluation in the public prosecution structure so far. The Supreme Public Prosecutor decided on criteria of evaluation of public prosecutors as well as other staff working in the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office. The date of the first evaluation was set at 31st January 2016. Criteria for evaluation of public prosecutors of the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office are as follows: managerial skills, quality and productivity of work, proffesional knowledge and skills, linguistic skills, intelectual skills, cooperation with other subjects, broader work activities.   

The evaluation is carried out by an immediate superior of a public prosecutor. The superior who carries out the evaluation makes the evaluated public prosecutor familiar with the evaluation without undue delay and gives him a copy on request. The evaluated public prosecutor writes his own opinion if he agrees with the evaluation or not. Eventually the evaluated public prosecutor can submit his own separate opinion. De lege ferenda, the Bill on public prosecution enshrines a regular evaluation of public prosecutors.    

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

In the structure of public prosecution there is a compulsory specialisation of public prosecutors in offences which do not time barr, crimes against humanity, war crimes, terrorism and organised crime (offences of participation in an organized group and crimes committed on behalf of an organized group). These specialisations are established at regional, high and the Supreme public prosecutor's office. Public prosecutors usually deal with crimes according to their specialisation.

Art 12 of the Council Decision 2002/187/JHA setting up Eurojust contains a possibility to appoint a national correspondent for particular matters. A national correspondent for terrorism is of a special value. In the Czech Republic this position was set up and is performed by a public prosecutor of the Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office. National correspondents and their expert teams are guarantors of interdepartmental cooperation as well as international cooperation on their field of work. They analyse court decisions and research papers, carry out questionnaires, take part in educational activities (especially organized by the Academy of Justice), participate in departmental cooperation and meetings of specialists, participate in or suggest participation of someone else in specialised conferences.  

In this context it can be mentioned that a fuction of national correspondent for corruption, money laundering, searches and confiscation of criminal assets  was set up as well as national correspondent for financial crime and cybercrime, protection of interests of the EU and intellectual property rights.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Currently, the Czech Republic fulfills all the legislative standards which it is obliged to comply with by the international commitments. However, there are fields where it is desirable to promote changes.

The Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office carried out a working version of a regulation on rules of procedure of public prosecution which aims at terrorist threats from the part of the so called sleeper terrorist cells, lone wolves etc. as it has happened in France lately. The new version of the regulation authorizes the high prosecutor's offices only to deal with terrorist crimes. 

In the context of enacting the new regulation of rules of procedure of public prosecution strengthening specialisation of public prosecutors on terrorist crime is assumed.

The Supreme Public Prosecutor's Office carried out a material on readiness of public prosecution for terrorist threats in December 2015. On the base of this material following conclusions were drawn:

·         legal regulation on the field of material criminal law is sufficient

·         regulation of capital punishment is precluded

·         there emerged a need to regulate various exceptions to the violation of human rights within the criminal procedure (prolongation of detaining a person as well as a time determined for a judge to decide on one's personal freedom, a possibility to carry out a house search as well as a search of other premises without a consent of a judge, a possibility to carry out electronic evidence without a consent of a judge). It will be necessary to regulate limits of these exceptions in order not to collide with the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms

·         absence of the so called registrational protection of public prosecutors and their family members who deal with dangerous cases and their lives and health can be endangered.

 

Currently, the Government has discussed a document called „System of promulgation degrees of terrorism threats“. This document was discussed as a consequence of terrorist attacks in Paris in January and November 2015. By regulating these measures the Czech Republic will belong among the majority of EU member states which use the system of promulgation of degrees in relation to terrorism. 

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

The mentioned organisations as well as the international cooperation do work well and in an effective way in our opinion. We also appreciate the flexibility in transferring perpetrators using the European Arrest Warrant.

As for the Eurojust, we appreciate joint investigation teams as an important instrument of international cooperation. Public prosecutors regularly take part in seminars and meetings arranged by Eurojust focused on terrorism and other serious forms of organized crime. 

8. What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

See also Q 6.

Another challenge is the requirement for approximation of criminal law within the EU on the field of fight against terrorism. The Czech Republic therefore welcomes proposal of a directive on combating terrorism and replacing Council Framework Decision 2002/475/JHA on combating terrorism because the Czech Republic agrees with the opinion of the Commission that because of the cross-border character of terrorist attacks it is necessary to unify criminal law in this field.    

It is also necessary to focus on combatting the conventional terrorism as well as terrorism committed via internet.


Denmark / Danemark

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

For the last 5 years, the Danish Prosecution service has initiated a number of strategic activities aiming at defining and enhancing the quality of prosecutorial activities.

Some examples can be mentioned:

-       Each prosecution office has established a separate unit, headed by a chief prosecutor, to be responsible for local quality. These units are in charge of local projects to enhance quality – also in the work of the Police as well as responsible for implementing national initiatives regarding quality

-       Each level of the prosecution service is subject to inspection and review from the higher level. Such reviews may often encompass elements on how quality with relation to certain types of cases is ensured. Also, the higher level of the prosecution issues guidelines and instructions on how certain types of cases should be dealt with.

-       A survey on the quality of prosecutors’ performance in court has been carried out amongst the local courts

-       A project defining how to perform well in court has been developed and implemented

-       Guidelines are issued by the DPP on how to deal with cases in specific areas of crime

-       A project on how to improve written communications with citizens has been developed and implemented

-       A national data base on court practice, procedural questions and best practices has been developed. All prosecutors have access to ipads so that they can access this data base while in court

-       At the office of the DPP, a specialised unit is tasked – in cooperation with local practitioners - with sharing relevant information and knowledge

-       Both local and national procedures have been established so that prosecutors can share knowledge

-       Attention on the need to prioritize quality has been ensured at management level

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Relevant sharing of information and specific initiatives in identified areas of crime and procedures are seen as most relevant in order to enhance quality. Also reliable access to it-based information is seen as important.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

In 2016, a new project is implemented in all local prosecution office where indicators for quality will be developed. The purpose of the project is to define “quality”, to establish the relevant level of quality in specific areas of cases and to measure the level of quality in order to ensure a proper and uniform quality level throughout the country.

The project will work with defining the relevant level of quality in order to ensure the proper balance between quality and efficiency.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Prosecutors are evaluated 4 times a year. However, focus of the evaluation is pro-active rather than retro-active. All younger prosecutors have been appointed a mentor who follows the daily work and who will also at times accompany the prosecutor in court to supervise the performance there.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

         

          NO

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

NO

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Yes

8.              What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Due to the increasing complexity of some types of cases, it is important constantly to be abreast of developments. With regard to standard cases, a challenge is often to strike the right balance between efficiency and quality.


Estonia / Estonie

1.       Yes, we do. We periodically evaluate the work of the prosecutors and ensure the quality of their work.

2.       Independence, impartiality are certainly very important and considered very crucial.

3.       Important indicators are verdicts themselves, the number and complexity of the cases, the feedback and evaluation from the chief prosecutors.

4.       This is basicly the same as the answer to the previous question – the procedure will include the feedback and evaluation from chief prosecutors and the court verdicts themselves. The evaluation also affects the part of salary that is in connection with the concrete results (the so called bonus salary).

5.       There is no different or specific criteria or indicators for this concrete group of prosecutors.

6.       In the near future we would like to take the Estonian legislation (regarding the terrorism issues) in accordance with the international legislative forms. We would like to organize more international trainings to our prosecutors regarding the fight against terrorism. In the surveillance activities we would like to reorganize the work principles.

7.       As the Prosecutor`s Office we can give the opinion about Eurojust – the contribution of Eurojust is very important and has given the positive effect. Eurojust helps to find all the important contacts and ensure the international cooperation.

8.       The main challenges are the absence of the methodology and the absence of the control mechanisms.


Finland / Finlande

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done? 

The Finnish Prosecution Service’s performance guidance system sets out the organisation’s quality targets which are monitored annually. The Service has a system of specialised prosecutors, which is used to monitor the management of particularly demanding criminal cases.

While the Finnish Prosecution Service has not yet adopted quality management, widely used elsewhere, work is underway to introduce a quality management system. Detailed process descriptions will be drawn up and quality management will become an integral part of organisational management. The existing system of specialized prosecutors will also be developed further, especially focusing on the monitoring and improvement of quality.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Independence of prosecutors: The independence of prosecutors is provided in legislation (the Constitution and the Act on the Prosecution Service). According to these acts, the prosecutor’s decision is based on his or her consideration alone, and no other body has the right to intervene with the prosecutor's decision, the only exception being the Prosecutor General who may take over the consideration of a case from a subordinate. In such a case, the responsibility for dealing with the case is transferred to the Prosecutor General in full. In Finland, the prosecutors’ decisions are not hierarchical and a prosecutor always makes decisions independently.

Impartiality of prosecutors: In Finland, the prosecutors’ decision profiles, i.e. whether they provide consistent, impartial solutions for cases that are similar to each other, are closely monitored. A system has been set up which the central administrative authority (Office of the Prosecutor General) and each local prosecutor’s office can access to monitor the prosecutors’ decision profiles digitally in real time (on daily basis if necessary).

Impartiality of the prosecutors’ activities is also monitored with the help of general instructions given by the Prosecutor General and by the management group of the Finnish Prosecution Service (with representatives from the central administrative office and the local prosecutors’ offices). Furthermore, the ethical guidelines of the Finnish Prosecution Service steer and influence the assessment of the prosecutors’ work.

Complaints against the decisions made by the prosecutor can be addressed to the central administrative authority, the Office of the Prosecutor General. The complaint rulings will have an impact to the quality of the prosecutor’s work.

Human resources: The prosecutor recruitment process seeks to select individuals who can contribute to the Service efficiently and demonstrate high quality work. The Finnish Prosecution Service uses a multi-level training system to help prosecutors enhance their professional skills.

The workload of each prosecutor can be monitored in real time with the help of digital statistics. If deviations are found, the matter will be investigated.

Material resources: The most important resource of the Finnish Prosecution Service is its people. Consequently, most of the Service’s appropriations are allocated to employee pay. Due to the current state of central government finances, the Prosecution Service’s operational appropriations have also faced cuts in recent years, making it difficult to increase the human resource allocation. However, quality of the prosecutors’ work must not suffer. Instead, we seek to improve our operations, for example by significantly investing in digitalisation.

Working conditions: The Finnish Prosecution Services is committed to looking after our employees’ wellbeing at work. Our actions have a major positive effect on the quality and the efficiency of the prosecutors’ work. Continuous development of working methods is vital. Good tools and premises also make a big difference. The Service has a flexible attitude towards remote working.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The Finnish Prosecution Service employs performance guidance indicators which measure productivity and economy. We also systematically monitor the prosecutors’ decision profiles (i.e. the prosecutors’ course of action in similar matters) and the processing times of cases which the prosecutors’ have taken up for consideration. The cases are classified according to their average workload and degree of difficulty (competence classification). In demanding criminal cases, special monitoring takes place concerning, for example, the time taken for the consideration of charges. The matters mentioned above can be monitored digitally in real time by the central administrative authority and the local office.

Unofficial indicators include the supervisors’ reports on the quality and efficiency of the prosecutors’ work. Supervisors monitor these matters as part of their role, and they often provide the best overview of the situation since they work closely with the individual prosecutors.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

While the Finnish Prosecution Service has not yet adopted a systematic evaluation system, the quality management system currently underway will include one. Currently, evaluation is carried out mainly by the supervisors and the department head, and the observations are discussed in the meetings of the local offices and the central administrative authority.

Prosecutors will always be given an opportunity to respond to the observations of their work, in a discussion with the supervisor. The Service does not have a formal complaints procedure.

If the matter concerns the management of a criminal case, the Prosecutor General, who is at the top of the supervision hierarchy of prosecutors, can take over the consideration of the case from an individual prosecutor. The prosecutor whose case has been taken over is released from the case management and any related responsibilities.  This decision cannot be appealed.

When the prosecutor’s activities are assessed in accordance with the law of public servants and a sanction at a certain level, such as a warning, has been given to the prosecutor, he or she has the right to appeal against the sanction in court.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

             Resources are committed to prosecutor training. Organised crime and terrorist offences have been assigned specialized prosecutors who mainly deal with these cases. Specialized prosecutors receive in-depth training in this area. They have regular meetings and training events and communicate with the pre-trial investigation authorities and specialists investigating organised crime and terrorism. They also attend relevant international meetings and participate in prosecutor networks. The above measures take place in order to ensure high-level professionalism of prosecutors, guarantee the quality of their work and improve effectiveness.

             With regard to terrorist offences, the prosecutors’ training has only just started to develop in Finland. Until 2015, Finland had not had any suspects of terrorist offences. Since the situation has now changed to a certain degree, prosecutors are receiving training in the subject.

         - evaluate their work?

             See Answer 4. The prosecutors’ work is also assessed in the specialized prosecutors’ regular meetings in which they analyse the court judgments in cases involving organised crime, ensuring that all specialized prosecutors are informed of the case law. The specialized prosecutor function can enhance the quality and effectiveness of the prosecutors’ work. Best practice and any problems that have been observed are highlighted, and prosecutors can be advised to refresh their professional skills.

            

             The Finnish Prosecution Services has not accumulated any experience in dealing with terrorist offences as of yet.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Organised crime: The Finnish Criminal Code standardised the definitions for organised crime in 2015. This has facilitated the consideration by prosecutors and harmonised the practices. Specialized prosecutors who deal with organised crime cases follow the legal practice of the courts and report it to the Office of the Prosecutor General. Based on their observations, the quality of the prosecutors’ work can be assessed.

Terrorist offences: Concerning terrorist offences, Finland has implemented comprehensive legislation which complies with international treaties. The latest amendments to the Criminal Code were effected in 2014 when training for the purpose of committing terrorist offences, recruitment for the commission of a terrorist offence and funding of terrorist offences were criminalised.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

The organised crime definition used in the Finnish Criminal Code is now closer to the definitions of international treaties. In this regard, the situation has improved. With the exception of the definition of organised crime, no major problems have been observed in legal practice regarding differences between the international treaties and national legislation. No Finnish case law exists for terrorist offences.

The Finnish prosecutors have very positive experiences of the assistance they have received from Eurojust. While they are actively collaborating with Eurojust, very little cooperation take place with Europol and Interpol since these institutions mainly serve the law enforcement authorities.

Eurojust has significantly advanced the coordination of criminal investigations and prosecution by organising several transnational coordination meetings, funding the activities of joint research teams and, with Europol, establishing coordination centres used by the authorities in different countries to carry out urgent measures in real time in order to solve crimes. Eurojust has expedited matters related to mutual legal assistance and extradition of offenders.

Eurojust holds specialist meetings and seminars which improve the prosecutors’ professional competences. Under the Eurojust umbrella there are several specialist prosecutor networks, such as the terrorism network and joint investigation team network. Since the network members are involved in the practice of prosecution, participation enhances the prosecutors’ knowledge and skills and improves the quality of their work.

The more Eurojust commits its resources to assisting to solve serious transnational crime in the member states, the better it can contribute to the effectiveness of criminal procedures.

Europol is, first and foremost, an analytical unit. High-quality and timely analytical data on crime suspects or new criminal phenomena is important so as to initiate pre-trial investigations efficiently and to prepare for new criminal phenomena in time.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Currently, our development priority is to finalise the national, systematic quality management and evaluation system. The work has commenced.

Some challenging issues:

-       Successful recruitment of prosecutors

-       Sufficiency and correct allocation of resources

-       Maintenance and improvement of the professional skills of prosecutors

-       Effective cooperation between the authorities in national and transnational crime investigation

-       Ability to ensure that the prosecutors' work uniformity (the prosecutors make consistent decisions in similar cases)

-       Preparedness for new criminal phenomena


Georgia / Géorgie

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Department for Strategic Development and Supervision over Prosecutorial Activities operates at the Office of the Chief Prosecutor of Georgia and the main function of the said Department is to control the quality of the work of prosecutors.

The aforementioned Department exercises annual assessment of the work of prosecutors in several areas:

a)            Analysis of prosecutors’ workload is prepared, which contains data regarding the workload of each prosecutor (number of: examined applications, cases, documents drafted by them, of rulings, terminated criminal cases and etc.);

b)            Prosecutors’ presentation skills at the court are monitored in accordance with to the preliminarily established criteria;

c)            Documents drafted by prosecutors are monitored (substantiation, legal writing skills and etc.);

d)            Prosecutors’ work in electronic system is monitored.

After each monitoring annual analysis, reflecting gaps revealed through the monitoring process, is provided. Trainings on proper issues are planned for relevant prosecutors in order to improve the quality of their work.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

High level of prosecutors’ qualification is the first indicator for ensuring high quality and efficiency of prosecutors’ activities. Consequently, a person willing to work as a prosecutor faces high requirements (they are passing several exams). Herewith, after being appointed they permanently undergo trainings.

Independence of prosecutors also provides high quality and efficiency of their work. Impartiality and political neutrality are main principles of the Georgian prosecution service activities. As a result of the recent reform exercised in the Prosecution System, that radically changed the rule of appointing and dismissing the Chief Prosecutor, Prosecution Service became even more independent. In result of the mentioned amendments the Chief Prosecutor is appointed for the term of 6 years. The representatives of executive, private and highest representative authorities, as well as prosecutors through the members of the independent collegial body – the Prosecutorial Council – are involved in the process of his/her appointment.

Obviously, the conditions in which prosecutors are working as well as accessible material resources are of great significance.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

Quality of prosecutors’ work is assessed in several areas:

a)            Workload (number of: examined applications, cases, documents drafted by them, rulings, terminated criminal cases and etc.);

b)            Prosecutors’ presentation skills at the court;

c)            Substantiation and legal grounding of procedural documents;

d)            Quality of working in electronic system.

4.          Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Department for Strategic Development and Supervision over Prosecutorial Activities operates at the Office of the Chief Prosecutor of Georgia and the main function of the said Department is to control the quality of the work of prosecutors.

The aforementioned Department exercises annual assessment of the work of prosecutors in several areas. Each area is evaluated at least once in a year.

The results of the monitoring give rise to the necessity of using disciplinary sanctions or incentives in relation to the prosecutors.

In 2016 collegial body – the Prosecutorial Council was founded at the Office of the Chief Prosecutor of Georgia; one of the functions of the aforesaid Council is to examine the matter of disciplinary responsibility of a prosecutor. Prosecutor is entitled to express his/her opinion before the Prosecutorial Council with regards to the results of the monitoring and application of disciplinary sanctions thereof.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

There are special divisions at the Prosecution Service of Georgia that exercise prosecutorial supervision over organised crime and terrorism. Prosecutors working in the aforesaid divisions are undergoing special trainings. Their works are evaluated based on the general criteria and taking into consideration specificity of the work.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

---------

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Applicable international conventions enable us to manifest maximal collaboration in the course of international cooperation with regards to organised crime and terrorism cases.  Herewith, application of data base and wire of the named international organizations in the course of cooperation promotes increase of efficiency of the mentioned collaboration. Aspiration of Georgia to conclude a relevant agreement with Eurojust shall also be taken into consideration.  

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Access to new technologies and their application in the course of exercising investigative and prosecutorial supervision.


Germany / Allemagne

   Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

            Yes, there are several components of qualitymanagement procedures to   approve the daily work of prosecutors and by this to achieve the role and        the       goals of of prosecutors. Inter alia, this is done by statistics on the duration of     the proceedings, benchmarking between prosecutors offices, training             programs, peer reviews, staff interviews, client evaluation, internal  audit and         monitoring procedures, complaints procedure, 

   Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

          The personality of prosecutors is pivotal for securing the highest quality and efficiency of prosecutors. Therefore assessment procedures to select prosecutors are of utmost importance to find out whether the candidate

        feels to be binded on law and justice

        knows the law and the jurisdiction

        is able to find out facts and comes to just and fair results

        seeks for equality before the law and fair rial

        acts with the most possible transparency

        comes to decisions within reasonable time and in understandable language

        pays attention to the legitimate interests and personal rights of the persons involved in the procedure

        cooperates  team-orientated

        saves the ressources to work in a most economic way.

These skills are part of the training programs for prosecutors during their career.

   Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

          There are permanent statistics existing, concerning the workload of every prosecutor and the duration of the proceedings. In cases with detention a monthhly report on the progress of the investigation has to be given to the head of the prosecution service, after six months of detention tthe case has to be sent to the High Court of the Land (Oberlandesgericht).

   Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

            In Germany, there is no formal procedure for the evaluation of the work of the        prosecutor. The complaints procedure allows an informal view on the quality            of the work of every prosecutor.

   As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?    No, but special security measures.

         - evaluate their work?    No

   Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

            Last year, a new law on electronic Surveillance has been adopted.

   Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

            Cross border information and direct contacts between prosecution offices should be facilitated.

   What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

            The cooperation between intelligence agencies and prosecution offices      hould be intensified, the rules in this field should be more clear.

            And, sorry to remark again, we need more staff in thiese fields of severe    criminality.


Greece / Grèce

9.         Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

In Greece, the inspection of the quality of the work efficiency of the prosecutors is effective and is achieved by some inspectors appointed every year to this end following a ballot conducted by the Higher Judges Council of the Supreme Court (Areios Pagos), who are Supreme Court Judges and Supreme Court prosecutors and work exclusively for one year; they prepare personal reports, namely a report relates to each prosecutor and is a basic criterion for their progress in the service.

10.      Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

The scientific training, the judgment and the perception, the diligence and the hard work are sine qua non conditions to achieve higher quality and efficiency in the work of prosecutors. In any case, the moral qualifications, to wit, the moral standards, the courage, the personality and the behavior (in the service and in the community) of the prosecutors are taken into account and assessed.

11.      Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The various instructions and orders of the Supreme Court (Areios Pagos) Prosecution (that are compulsorily enforceable by the current prosecutors, without of course being related to the substantial ruling of the prosecutors for the cases they handle) determine, in addition to the scientific training, the indicators that are taken into consideration during the assessment of the work of prosecutors (time limit of legal file processing based on the difficulty of the cases, compliance with the flagrante procedure, way to prepare motions and ordinances, etc).

12.      Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

In accordance with the Court By-Laws Code and Court Officers Status, the work of prosecutors (with the exception of the prosecution officers serving in the Supreme Court Prosecution) inspected and evaluated every year by the inspectors appointed to this end (Supreme Court judges and deputy Supreme Court prosecutors), who prepare a related personal report for each one of the inspected prosecutors, the specific reports are taken into account for their progress in the service, especially in view of their imminent promotion.  The foregoing Code provides for the possibility of the prosecutors to raise objections to the report regarding their personal evaluation before the proper Inspection Council (consisted of a Supreme Court vice-president exclusively engaged in, a Supreme Court judge and a Supreme Court deputy prosecutor).

13.      As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

a) First part of the question: In Greece, by decision of the Supreme Court Higher Judges Council, a prosecutor is appointed in the Hellenic Police Direction for the Security Police of Attica and a prosecutor is appointed in the Direction for the Security Police of Thessaloniki, fully and exclusively engaged in, for three (3) years, to inspect and to guide the work of the above services in the fight against organised crime and terrorism.  The foregoing prosecutors are briefed about all the information and charges received by the above services, whilst they may order or conduct a preliminary investigation or a preliminary examination of crimes provided for in articles 187 and 272 of the Penal Code (article 4 of Law 2265/1994, as amended by articles 18 par.1 of Law 2622/1998, 12 of Law 3424/2005, 23 par.4 of Law 3511/2006 and 54 par.1 of Law 4249/2014).  The prosecutor that inspects the preliminary work of the Direction for the Security Police of Attica and the work of the Hellenic Police Direction for the Intelligence Administration and Analysis during the exercise of its powers, related to the collection, processing and evaluation of information and data (article 22 par.5 and 6 of Law 4249/2014, as par.5 and 6 thereof were added by article 231 par.4 of Law 4281/2014).

In the other Greek cities that are part of the jurisdiction of the regional Hellenic Police Directions for the Security Police (save Attica and Thessaloniki), the inspection and guidance of the work of the proper Directions for the Security Police in the fight against organised crime and terrorism is part of the work the respective prosecutors that have the local jurisdiction.

Furthermore, by decision of the Minister of Public Order and Citizens’ Protection, a Coordination, Analysis and Investigation Council is established to fight organised crime and terrorism, and it functions under the direct supervision of the Minister of Public Order and is consisted of thirteen (13) members and in particular, by one prosecutor, as chairman, who is appointed by decision of the Supreme Court Higher Judges Council fully and exclusively engaged in, for three years, that may be extended, six (6) officers of the Hellenic Police, graduates of Higher Education Institutes or with special knowledge and experience in matters of fighting against organised crime and six (6) scientists, holders of postgraduate diplomas (Master or PhD) in the sciences of Criminology, Law, Political Sciences, International Relations, Economics and Informatics, as members. The duty of this Council is to examine and analyse the forms of the organised crime and in particular, of the special violence crimes, to systematically examine and analyse the existing data in relation to such crimes, to prepare programmes and to create guidelines for the proper organisation of the prosecution authorities and the training and further training of their personnel in order to fight effectively against such criminal phenomena and to efficiently protect the country against the risk of such a criminal activity coming from other countries. The Council is also in charge of collecting from the proper services the individual assessments of a terrorist threat, of further processing and assessing them and of preparing a report every six months that will assess on a national level the existence of a terrorism threat (National Assessment of a Terrorist Threat). To this end, the proper Police Services, the National Intelligence Service, the General National Defense Staff and the Harbour Corps are required to work together. Also, all the related information of any state authority or service is available to this Council. The Council may take knowledge of all data of the preliminary investigation of such crimes committed in the country, at any stage of the procedure. The Council also develops a direct cooperation with the proper departments of the security services, on general matters or in specific cases of criminal activity and especially, has an ongoing cooperation with the Director of the Sub-Direction for Fighting against Special Violence Crimes to deal with the special violence crimes. In case of examination, review of analysis of special matters of which the Council has the authority, scientists specialised in these matters may also participate in the Council who work under an assignment employment contract or work for the Ministry of Public Order under a work relationship of any description.  By decision of the Ministers of Public Order and National Defense, officers of the Armed Forces may also participate in the Council.  If the prosecution authorities conduct according to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code, a preliminary investigation or a preliminary examination of special violence crime cases, the prosecutor who is a member of the council, conducts by himself, in addition to his duties exercised based on the provisions of the presidential decree issued as per par.5 of the same article, to his judgment,  the above preliminary investigation or preliminary examination (article 4 of Law 2265/1994 in conjunction with article 1 of PD 14/1995).

b) Second part of the question: The assessment of the work of the prosecutors, who responsible for the inspection and the guidance of the Hellenic Police services in the fight against organised crime and terrorism in Greece, is not specialised, but it is made by the proper instutitional agents that are common for all prosecutors.

14.       Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

The Greek legislation on the fight against organised crime and terrorism remains as it is in terms of criminal offences (articles 187 and 187A of Penal Code) whilst, by articles 6 of Law 4267/2014 (Government Gazette A-137/12-6-2014, harmonisation with article 14 of Directive 2011/93/EC) and 5 of Law 4274/2014 (GG A-147/14-7-2014), the provisions of article 187B of PC were amended and are now as follows:

«Clemency measures

1.       If any of the liable for the acts of establishing a terrorist organisation or criminal conspiracy or of participation therein as per paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 187 or of establishing a terrorist organisation or of participating therein as per paragraphs 4 of article 187A notifies the authority of the prevention of the commission of one of the contemplated crimes or in the same manner substantially contributes to the dismantling of the criminal organisation or criminal conspiracy or terrorist organisation, they are discharged of the sentence for such acts. If no criminal prosecution has been exercised yet, the prosecutor at the misdemeanours court abstains with an reasoned provision from the criminal prosecution and submits the legal file to the prosecutor at the appeal court, who acts according to article 43 par.2 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

2.       If in the case of previous paragraph, the liable person has committed one of the pursued crimes described in paragraphs 1 and 3 of article 187 or has committed one of the crimes described in paragraph 1 of article 187A, the court inflicts on him/her a reduced sentence as per article 83. In exceptional cases, the court, by evaluating all the circumstances and especially the danger of a criminal organisation, of a criminal conspiracy or a terrorist organisation, the extent of participation of the liable person therein and the extent of his/her contribution in its dismantling, may order the suspension of the enforcement of the sentence to three to ten years, and articles 99 to 104 will apply with regard to the remaining circumstances.

3.       Anyone who denounces punishable acts committed against him/her by a criminal organisation as per article 187 or by liable persons as per articles 323, 348A, 348B, 348C, 349 and 351, the prosecutor at the misdemeanours court, if the a denouncement is speculated to be grounded, it may, following an approval of the prosecutor at the appeal court, provisionally abstain from the criminal prosecution for violations of the law on aliens and extraditable persons on a reward, as well as for violations due to their participation in criminal activities, provided such participation was direct due to the fact that they were victims of the offences described in articles 323, 348A, 348B, 348C, 349 and 351, until a final court order is issued for the denounced acts. If the denouncement proves to be grounded, the abstention from the criminal prosecution becomes final. 3a) A liable person for any criminal act, save those described in article 187A of the Penal Code, for whom, before his/her final sentence, it is ruled that he contributed by providing information on his/her own initiative to the discovery or dismantling of a criminal organisation or enabled upon a notice to the authority the prevention of the commission of a criminal act or the discovery and arrest of absconders or fugitives from justice for acts of terrorism as per article 187A of the Penal Code, extenuating circumstances are acknowledged. If, for the discovery or dismantling of a terrorist organisation or for the prevention of the commission of a terrorism act or the arrest of absconders or fugitives from justice, it is necessary for such acts to provisionally release the foregoing liable person, the council at the misdemeanours court may order by decree the provisional suspension of the criminal prosecution of the foregoing and his/her provisional discharge from prison for a certain period in order to verify the aforementioned information. If, after the suspension of the criminal prosecution and release of the liable person, as set out above, the information provided by him/her were not true or it did not involve any criminal organisation or criminal acts described in article 187A of the Penal Code, the related decree is revoked, and the imprisonment of the liable person is again ordered and the suspended criminal prosecution against him is continued, unless there is a case of application of another favourable provision.  For the information provided by the liable person, a report of sworn witness examination is prepared, which is sent to the proper prosecutor at the appeal court in order to take knowledge.  The sworn witness report is kept in a special archive of the Prosecution, in which a report of the proper authority is sent and kept, which effected on the basis of the foregoing information the dismantling of the terrorist organization, the prevention of terrorist act or the arrest of the absconders or fugitives from justice for acts of terrorism. Only the members of the proper court council or court take knowledge of the foregoing reports, which examine also ex officio whether to issue or not the benefits provided for in the previous paragraphs. The provisions of paragraphs 1 and 2 of this or other laws providing for favourable measures or clemency measures, are not affected from the provisions of this paragraph.

4.       The deportation of aliens that are illegally in the country and denounce offences described in articles 323, 348A, 348B, 348C, 349 and 351 or committed by a criminal organisation of article 187, may, by an ordinance of the prosecutor at the misdemeanours court and approval of the prosecutor at the appeal court, be suspended until a final court order is issued on the denounced acts. As far as the suspension of deportation is in force, the aliens are issued with a residence permit notwithstanding the effective legislation on aliens».

15.       Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

We consider that the extension and broadening of the international, police and judicial cooperation is necessary for, in application of the effective international conventions and with the contribution of the existing international organisations Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, the assurance of the direct exchange of information necessary for the fight against the organised crime and terrorism, among the proper authorities of the EU member-states, as the case may be.

16.      What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

To assure the financial resources for the necessary support of the material-technical infrastructure and human resource (judges, prosecutors, court clerks, special policemen) that constitute determinant agents for the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors in the fight against organised crime and terrorism.


Hungary / Hongrie

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Current challenges perceived and experienced by all European prosecution services have given impetus for dealing with the questions of strategic planning especially when it comes to the question of increasingly bigger challenges of cross-border and transnational crimes.

The Prosecution Service of Hungary is aware of the high importance of strategic planning and therefore works according to its “Institutional Strategic Plan”. The Plan identifies the problematic areas and risks, defines the strategic goals and necessary actions.

The currently implemented plan covers the period of 2014-2020.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

The most important factors securing the highest quality and efficiency of prosecutorial work are constitutional and budgetary independence and impartiality.

According to Article 29 (1) of the Fundamental Law of Hungary the Prosecutor General and the Prosecution Service are independent entities. The Prosecution Service is obliged to report to Parliament only.

The organisation of the Prosecution Service shall be managed and directed by the Prosecutor General. Among the Prosecutor General’s powers the Constitutional Court recognized the right to appoint prosecutors and leaders, the employer’s rights, and the right to command. At the same time, the Constitutional Court underlines that these powers are limited by law i.e. the decisions may be challenged before the court.

Article 6 of the Act on the Prosecution Service provides that the Prosecution Service shall form a separate chapter of the budget in the Act on the Central Budget. The right to prepare the proposal for this chapter of the Budget belongs to the Prosecutor General. The government shall submit both the proposal and the report on the implementation of the budget regarding the Prosecution Service to the Parliament without changes.

According to the Act on the Legal Status of Prosecutors, they may not be Members of Parliament, Members of the European Parliament, local municipality board representatives, nationality representatives, mayors or state leaders. Prosecutors may not engage in gainful activities beyond the fulfilment of their office, not including any academic and teaching work (as coach, referee or umpire), artistic activities and activities under copyright protection, proof-reading and editorial work and creative technical work, provided that these do not jeopardise their independence and impartiality and do not hinder them in the fulfilment of their official obligations.

3.            Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

In order to ensure and increase the quality and efficiency of public prosecutors’ work, constantly improved prosecutorial IT infrastructures and database are available. Each prosecutorial organizational unit collects and regularly reports data to the Office of the Prosecutor General on the number of received and handled cases, workload, length of procedures etc. The database and comprehensive statistics serve as a base for important decisions of the Prosecutor General such as decisions of the organizational structure and distributing personnel within the organization.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

The complex evaluation system of prosecutors is defined by Articles 50-52 of the Act on the Legal Status of Prosecutors as follows:

Section 50

(1) Prosecutors, with the exception of the Prosecutor General and the Deputy Prosecutor General, shall be assessed before the expiry of the fixed term of the first prosecution appointment, while in the case of a first appointment for an indefinite term, before the expiry of a period of three years following the appointment, and thereafter every eight years, provided that they worked under the supervision of the assessor or his/her deputy for minimum one year during the assessment period. Prosecutors need not be assessed during the six years preceding the completion of the applicable old-age pension age.

(2) In addition to the cases mentioned in Paragraph (1), a prosecutor shall also be assessed if a) requested by the prosecutor, provided that two years have elapsed since the previous assessment, b) circumstances have emerged that indicate the prosecutor’s professional ineligibility or the necessity to alter the evaluation of the previous assessment, c) in the extraordinary proceeding to be completed without delay, he fails to meet the deadline extended by the superior prosecutor under the Code of the Criminal Procedure after the presentation of the files of the investigation to ensure the examination of such files.

(3) In the case referred to in Paragraph (2), Points b) and c), the prosecutor shall be notified of the extraordinary assessment in writing.

(4) Assessment is the duty of the person exercising the employer’s rights. The official work of prosecutors assigned to the Ministry shall be evaluated by the Minister responsible for justice in accordance with the rules applicable to government officials.

(5) The purpose of assessment is to assess the quality of the prosecutor’s professional activities, to evaluate his/her skills, abilities and character traits with an impact thereon and to facilitate professional development.

(6) The assessment may only feature duly supported, factual findings.

Section 51

(1) As a result of the assessment, prosecutors may be awarded the following evaluation grades: a) excellent, suitable for promotion, b) excellent and fully eligible, c) eligible, d) eligible, subsequent assessment required, e) ineligible.

(2) In the event of an ineligible grade, upon the disclosure of the result of the assessment, the prosecutor shall be called upon to resign his/her office within thirty days.

(3) If ineligibility is a consequence of health-related circumstances and the prosecutor does not resign his/her office in spite of the notice referred to in Paragraph (2), it is necessary to have the prosecutor’s state of health examined, and subsequent action shall depend on the outcome of the examination. The prosecutor is obliged to subject him/herself to the examination. The provisions of Section 12 (3)–(5) shall duly govern the examination. The costs of the examination shall be covered by the employer.

(4) If the prosecutor is awarded an evaluation grade “eligible, subsequent assessment required” as a result of the assessment, the person exercising the employer’s rights shall identify the deficiencies and irregularities experienced in the assessment and shall state the main criteria of the desired changes which shall be reviewed prior to the next assessment. The next assessment shall be carried out within 2 years. A prosecutor repeatedly appointed for a fixed term under Section 17 (4) shall be assessed by the sixtieth day preceding the expiry of the fixed term, at the latest.

(5) A prosecutor shall be awarded an ineligible grade upon the next assessment if he/she fails to obtain an eligible grade on the occasion of this assessment.

Section 52

(1) The assessment shall be disclosed to the prosecutor. The assessment shall be handed over to the prosecutor minimum three working days before the official notification procedure. In addition to the person exercising the employer’s rights, the head of the prosecution office where the prosecutor serves shall also attend the official notification procedure. The prosecutor shall verify the fact of due notification by signing the assessment and may state his/her remarks if there are any upon the official notification procedure, at the latest.

(2) One copy of the assessment shall be handed over to the prosecutor at the official notification procedure.

(3) The prosecutor’s assessment may be viewed by a) the prosecutor and any other person authorised by him; b) the prosecutor’s superiors; c) the prosecution employee responsible for the management of human resources; d) the head and prosecutor responsible for the management of human resources of the prosecution body to which the prosecutor is planned to be transferred.

(4) The prosecutor may request a court of law to quash any erroneous or untrue finding in the assessment or any other finding that may be injurious to his/her personality rights.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to facilitate and evaluate their work?

Due to criminal offences becoming transnational, the problem of concealing of assets and the current problem of terrorism two new divisions have been set up within the Central Chief Prosecution Office of Investigation as of 1st May 2015.  These two divisions are the Division for International Cooperation and Coordination and the Division against Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing. 

As a continuation of these structural changes and in reaction to threats of terrorism and new forms of crime two new departments were established at the Office of the Prosecutor General. The two departments named the Counter-Terrorism, Anti-Money Laundering and Military Cases Department and the Department for Priority, Corruption and Organized Crime Cases started their work in January 2016. Prosecutors working at these departments are subject to national security screening.

A high level of assets recovery requirements apply to the fight against organized crimes and corruption. Several bylaws on these requirements and on the procedures to be followed have been issued both by the Deputy Prosecutor General and the heads of the concerned Departments.

As far as the evaluation of prosecutorial work is concerned, the general rules prescribed in Answer 4 apply.

6.    Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

The following legislative acts should be mentioned in this context.

Act C of 2012 - the new Criminal Code - entered into force on 1 July 2013. Due to the country report of the Moneyval under the new Code “Financing terrorism” has become a distinct and separate crime and the term “financial means” has been defined.

Act CCXXIII of 2012 has delegated the tasks of tracking and securing illegal assets to a special investigation authority. This Act has also made possible the tracking and securing of certain illegal assets after final court judgements.

Act LXXVI of 2015 has clarified the rules to be applied when sanctioning members of criminal organisations in order to unify relevant case law.

Act CXL of 2015 has introduced reversed burden of proof in relation to the origin of illegal assets gained in a course of illegal immigrant smuggling.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

In our opinion, the present multilateral treaties serve as a good base for wide-range international co-operation that are implemented by the effective mutual recognition tools of the European Union.

Eurojust and Europol are of great help in coordinating investigations which affect more than one Member State by supporting joint investigation teams, providing evaluation-analysation capacities and exchange of information. Interpol facilitates information and data exchange with third counties prior to the issue of formal MLA requests.

The new forms a co-operation between experts specialised in the fight against organised crime and terrorism are warmly welcomed, e.g. the Counter Terrorism Prosecutors Network (CTPN) and Europol’s European Counter Terrorism Centre.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Our main challenges are the difficulties we meet when proving organised crime and terrorist cases before the court. Prosecutors dealing with such kind of cases work with the means of under-cover investigations, they are to pay special attention to the protection of witnesses and other procedural guarantees. All these tasks require up-to-date and high-level professional knowledge, firmness, inventiveness and proactive approach.


Italia / Italie

1.      Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

The organization of the Prosecution Offices is basically in the hands of single Chief prosecutors (i.e. the Chiefs of the Prosecution Offices at each Italian Court). The organizational model adopted by each of them is then subject to the scrutiny of the Judicial Council (within each District), as well as to the High Council of the Judiciary.

Such a control ensures some kind of uniformity of approach within the national territory.

The quality of the prosecutors’ work is generally ensured by a partition in different matters, which allows the specialization of prosecutors. As a consequence, they are generally quicker in deciding the cases and the quality of the adopted decisions is improved.

Furthermore, the Chief Prosecutor steadily checks on them: the powers of intervention and withdrawal of assigning a case have been bestowed upon him in the event that a conflict on how an assigned case is handled might arise or a deputy prosecutor in charge of a case might not comply with (generally established or case-to-case) principles and standards.

         

2.             Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

In the Italian legal system, the independence and impartiality of the judiciary are regarded as essential principles. They are enshrined in the Italian Constitution in relation both to judges and prosecutors. In addition to these principles, the principle of security of tenure of the judiciary ensures the independence of judges and prosecutors even from any indirect pressure.

A well-structured system of vocational training, in the first place, and then on-the-job training is envisaged to ensure top quality in the work of prosecutors and judges. A period of training of 18 months is envisaged for trainee judges/prosecutors: it is organized in several sessions to be held at the High School for the Judiciary and in the courts. All members of the judiciary are expected to follow continuing education programs both at national and district level.

Human and material means –including technology– are also regarded as pivotal resources. However, the Italian prosecution service does not conduct any negotiations, either on them or on the budget.

3.             Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

In Italy there is a well-structured system of statistical surveys in the all justice field. This system makes it possible to draw useful data to assess the “efficiency”, meaning the respect for the different deadlines included in the proceedings and the respect for the overall length of trial proceedings.

No “indicators” on quality assessment are collected, since it may be hard to define such a standard in itself even before any survey can be made. Until now, these difficulties have prevented the adoption of a shared system for the collection of the so-called “required workload” (that is the highest level of “productivity” that judges and prosecutors are required to provide), despite all attempts at doing so in a long time. The elaboration is going on.

4.             Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Both Italian judges and prosecutors are subject to a mechanism of professional assessment every four years and up to the 7th level of proficiency check. This system is based upon different standards (legal background, mastery in the techniques used in the different fields of prosecution and jurisdiction activity, outcome of the judicial decisions they have taken, quantity and quality of their work, respect for the deadlines in the drafting of decisions, as well as participation of (judges and) prosecutors in the smooth running of the offices they are assigned to).

The High Council of the Judiciary conducts a proficiency check based upon the opinion expressed by the Judicial Council (a district-based council) and the obtained documents.

The Judicial Council’s opinion is respectively grounded upon the Chief Prosecutor’s report, the assessment of the deeds drawn by a prosecutor (some of them are sample extracts and some others are singled out by him/her) and also some other elements of information it may acquire.

5.             As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

 - facilitate their work?

The Anti-mafia District Prosecution Office has been established within the Prosecution Office at the District Court of Appeal, located in the area’s main city. It has a special jurisdiction in the field of organized crime, with respect to some particularly serious offences.

The Anti-mafia District Prosecution Offices are coordinated at national level by the Anti-mafia National Directorate.

In 2015 the Anti-mafia District Prosecution Offices and the Anti-mafia National Directorate were conferred powers in the field of anti-terrorism.

 - evaluate their work?

 Just like all judges and prosecutors, even the prosecutors responsible for the Anti-mafia Directorate are subject to the assessment mechanism mentioned at No. 4. They are appointed to work for the Anti-Mafia District Prosecution Office for two years and their appointment (which may be renewed every two years up to an overall period of no more than ten years) is subject to a specific job evaluation.

6.              Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Italy ratified many conventions developed within the Council of Europe and the United Nations in relation to the fight against terrorism and it implemented the instruments adopted in this area within the European Union.

The Anti-mafia District Prosecution Offices and the Anti-mafia National Directorate were established at national level, as mentioned at No. 5.

7.              Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Taking into consideration the typically cross-border nature of organised crime and terrorism, we do have to positively evaluate international organisations like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, tending to improve the fight against this kind of crimes.

The establishment of a European Prosecutor seems to be a natural consequence of these instruments, as also mentioned in the T.F.E.U. (Article 86). Italy has always been in favour of the establishment of the EPPO (European Public Prosecutor’s Office).

In the years to come, this could also become an important instrument to fight against cross-border crime (although it has a more limited goal at the beginning, being intended to protect the financial interests of the Union). As a result, Italy is now a little disappointed by the recent (rather unambitious) developments of the debate on this issue.

 

8.              What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

An improvement in information exchange surely represents the major challenge to enhance efficiency and quality of the prosecutors’ work, especially in the fight against organized crime and terrorism (apart from an obvious development in human, material and technological resources). It is really worth wishing for an improvement in information exchange at international level (even by the means of sharing existing data-bases) as well as at national level.

In Italy the Anti-mafia District Prosecution Offices (as already said at point No. 5, these Offices were established within the Prosecution Offices at the District Courts of Appeal) undersigned several memoranda of understanding with other Prosecution Offices to allow the flow of data.

On this regard, special attention is to be given to the so-called “spy crimes”. These minor offences provide us with suggestions, or represent useful indicators to monitor the organized crime and terrorism-related phenomena.


Latvia / Lettonie

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

For ensuring quality in the work of Prosecutors in Latvia is being performed a range of measures, of which the most important are the following:

1)    The preventive monitoring performed by superior Prosecutors regarding quality of fulfilment of Prosecutor’s most important work duties.

2)    The planned inspections of work of Prosecutor’s and Prosecution Office divisions performed by superior Prosecutors.

3)    Assessment of the quality of decision taken by Prosecutor, if such decision is appealed.

4)    Evaluation of Prosecutor’s professional performance.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

In our point of view the independence and impartiality unambiguously is the pre-condition so that a person could be in position of Prosecutor at all. Sufficient human resources, technical and material supplies and working conditions are daily necessity for ensuring of quality and efficiency of Prosecutor’s work. In addition to that it is necessary to use such management arrangements which are motivating employees to do a job as better as possible. Nevertheless it is also substantial to ensure that employees have enough knowledges and skills for performing of their job, that they have a possibility to accumulate valuable experience, that they are keen to follow the changes both in legal framework and technologies and social processes as well. Due to that one of priorities in Latvia is to facilitate the constant professional growth of Prosecutors during the performing of work duties.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

In Latvia for evaluation of Prosecutor’s work quality and efficiency are used large number of official criteria. The most significant among them are the following: complying with the law provisions, including procedural deadlines, various quantitative indicators (number of resolved cases, number of taken decisions, participation in case examinations with the court etc.), complexity of the cases, quality of work results (examining, what is the quality of cases, in which Prosecutor is supervising the investigation, what is the quality of Prosecutor’s decisions, what were reasons for acquittal judgments in cases lodged with the court etc.), applying of different professional skills in work.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

In Latvia is performed official evaluation of professional performance of Prosecutors according to the Law and internal legal acts of the Prosecution Office. Individual evaluation of each Prosecutor is performed no less than once per five years by Prosecutor’s attestation commission, which is self-governance institution of Prosecutors. Prosecutor’s attestation commission provides positive or negative opinion on performance of Prosecutor under evaluation, but such opinion has legal consequences only in case if it is confirmed by Prosecutor General. If the professional performance of any specific Prosecutor receives repeated negative evaluation, Prosecutor shall be dismissed. Prosecutors have rights to present official objections against the opinion of Prosecutor’s attestation commission, as well as to appeal with the Court the dismissal order of Prosecutor General.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

With purpose to ensure the involvement of high level professionals into the fight with the organized crime and terrorism, in Latvia Prosecutor’s functions in this field are performed by special authorities: Prosecution Office for Fighting with the Organized Crime and Other Branches, Division of Especially Authorized Prosecutors of the Prosecutor’s General Office and Division for Investigation of Especially Important Cases of the Criminal Law Department of the Prosecutor’s General Office. Substantial contribution into the fight with the organized crime and financing of terrorism is provided also by the Service for Prevention of Money Laundering established by Prosecutor General. In the mentioned authorities are working experienced and highly professional officials, as well as for them is ensured equipment necessary for their work and reinforced security regime.

During the evaluation of professional performance of any Prosecutor his/her work in that specific field, where he/she is performing Prosecutors duties, is thoroughly evaluated. Hence regarding Prosecutors, who are fulfilling these functions in fight with the organized crime and terrorism, are evaluated the performance results and quality, professional skills, professional growth and other criteria specifically in these fields.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

As in Latvia was experienced the flourishing of the organized crime in the nineties, but in its turn new challenges in fight with the terrorism were encountered by the entire world after terrorist attacks in USA on September 11, 2001, consequently in Latvia during the last decade intensively and systematically were improved the legal acts in the field with fighting against the organized crime and terrorism, regularly adapting them to the new challenges and new possibilities, hence safeguarding the security of the state and society, as well as providing respective powers and instruments to the competent institutions involved in this fight, including Prosecution Office.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

International conventions and international organisations are ensuring stable base and giving necessary instruments for fight with the regular organized crime and separate cases of terrorism, but they not always are sufficiently efficient for fight with new and larger terrorism threats which are possible due to geopolitical changes in Europe and its neighbouring regions.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

It does not seem that any problems relevant specifically to our country would exist. The fight against the organized crime and terrorism in no country is easy, especially in the situation of growing threats of different kind. Hence as priority would be necessary to identify possibilities and methods for solving of those problems, which are more or less relevant to all Member States of the European Union.

Liechtenstein

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

The Office of the Public Prosecutor in Liechtenstein is headed by the Prosecutor General (PG). The Office of the Public Prosecutor is very small, consisting of only seven prosecutors. The Prosecutor General can issue written or oral instructions to the prosecutors. One of these instructions requires weekly and monthly reports and statistics, which enable the PG to detect undue delays and to ensure due process and progress in proceedings. In bimonthly team meetings open legal questions and overall strategies are discussed and – if necessary – laid down in formal instructions.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

All mentioned criteria (independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work) are considered crucial for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of the prosecutors.

             In performing their duties prosecutors are independent unless otherwise provided by the law. The prosecutors work independently and under their own responsibility within the framework of the tasks assigned to them according to the allocation of duties or in individual cases by the Prosecutor General. Only the Prosecutor General can issue written or oral instructions/orders to the prosecutors. Instructions must always be justified with reference to this provision of the law.

             Prosecutors may themselves request to be removed from a case or they may be rejected by the accused and the parties to the proceedings, if there is a close friendship, a personal dispute, or a special relationship of obligation or dependency with the accused or a party to the proceedings, if they have a legal dispute with the accused or a party to the proceedings or might be biased in the case on other grounds. Unless there is imminent danger, every prosecutor shall refrain from all prosecutorial acts from the time when a ground for exclusion is known.

             The prosecutors in Liechtenstein have sufficient human and material resources; the conditions of work are very good.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

             The quality and efficiency of the work of the prosecutors is assessed by the Prosecutor General, especially the number of cases considered and the duration of proceedings.  This is done by electronic registration and management of cases by reporting and statistics (see answer to question 1).

             These statistics also contain open cases with a duration of six month or longer.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

The administrative supervision of prosecutors is the responsibility of the Prosecutor General. Administrative supervision in particular encompasses surveillance of the caseload, completion deadlines, and keeping of the journal and register, monitoring of extended delays in proceedings and continued training in the administration of justice. No ordinary legal remedies are permissible against decrees and orders issued by the supervisory organs in the performance of administrative supervision.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

          Due to the smallness of the Office of the Public Prosecutor in Liechtenstein there is little specialisation. As far as organised crime and terrorism are concerned training and information on current trends is provided to prosecutors including participation in international seminars and conferences.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

             There are recent legislative reforms with the aim to make the fight against organised crime and terrorism more effective. The Criminal Code has been amended by provisions (the amendment will enter into to force at April 1st 2016) criminalising training for terrorism, instruction to commit a terroristic offence, public provocation to commit a terroristic offence and approval of terroristic offences.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

             The current international conventions are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

             The major challenges of Liechtenstein in the fight against organised crime and terrorism are the smallness of the country and the fact that the offence or predicate offence in almost all cases is committed abroad. 


Lithuania / Lituanie

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

The strategy of quality in the work of prosecutors is clearly defined by the management of the Prosecution Service; prosecutorial work quality indicators are set in the strategic plan and results are regularly analysed.

Every five years prosecutors’ work is assessed by Evaluation Commission. Also, the annual programmes for the prosecutors’ qualification development are set up, but due to the lack of financial resources trainings for prosecutors were not funded sufficiently, and thus continuous and effective improvement of competence cannot be ensured. In the nearest future the Prosecutor General’s Office will employ new staff specialising in prosecutors’ qualification development and competences and more funds will be allocated for this particular field.  

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Crucial criteria for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors are coherent legal framework, sufficient human resources, education, proper working conditions, as well as making criminal procedures clear and reasonable.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

There are many indicators to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors in Lithuania, such as number of cases per prosecutor, average length of the pre-trial investigation, percentage of acquitted persons, percentage of overruled prosecutor’s decisions, percentage of granted appeals, percentage of defective cases returned by the court to the prosecutor for review, etc. In case of prosecutors specialising in investigation of organised crime and terrorism cases, there are no specific criteria for assessing quality and efficiency of their activities – the above mentioned criteria are applied to assess the quality and efficiency of their work.   

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

There is a formal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors before Evaluation Commission. The procedure is mandatory for every prosecutor every 5 years. Subject to evaluation results, the Commission provides recommendations to the Prosecutor General regarding each evaluated prosecutor and has the right to offer the reward, give in-service trainings, downgrade the position or dismiss the prosecutor. Commission’s recommendations are not binding to the Prosecutor General. The evaluated prosecutors have the right to appeal against results of the evaluation to the Prosecutor General.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

The Prosecutor General’s Office of the Republic of Lithuania and five regional level prosecutor’s offices have divisions specialising in investigations of organised crime and corruption. Prosecutors working in these divisions also specialise in investigations of organised crime and terrorism cases. But there are no specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators aimed at facilitation and evaluation of the work of these prosecutors, which would be different from those applied to the prosecutors specialising in other areas of criminal procedure.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

On 1 January 2013 the Law on Criminal Intelligence became effective. This law is one of the main legal instruments to fight against organised crime. As a result of this legal regulation, more prosecutors were authorised to monitor the legitimacy of criminal intelligence and coordinate activities of criminal intelligence subjects.

A draft law on organised crime prevention and control has been registered in the Parliament of the Republic of Lithuania. This document aims at creation of mechanism, which would allow proper and efficient organising, implementing, monitoring and controlling organised crime prevention, determining the specific preventive controlling measures, and more detailed regulation of duties and rights of authorities implementing control of organised crime, thus creating conditions enabling more efficient fight against organised crime. Adoption of this law would guarantee an important role of prosecutors in implementation of the measures aimed at prevention of organised crime. Meanwhile, according to the current legal regulations, prosecutors do not participate in the process of organised crime prevention. 

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Current international conventions and international organisations may be considered as sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

As a result of reorganisation of Lithuanian prosecution system in 2011-2012, the competence of chief prosecutors of divisions of organised crime and corruption investigation operating in the Prosecutor General’s Office and territorial regional prosecutor’s offices was narrowed, and their salaries were reduced. Also, after reorganisation the prosecutors working in these divisions were deprived of some additional social guarantees, protective equipment and conditions of service. Besides, more in-service trainings related with fight against organised crime and terrorism are needed.

At present, there are initiatives undertaken aimed at adopting laws providing for more social guarantees to the prosecutors working in the divisions of organised crime and corruption investigation and providing more in-service trainings to them.


Republic of Moldova / République de Moldova

1.            The Decision of the Superior Council of Prosecutor’s, nr. 12-291/12 dated 04.12.2012, has approved the Strategic Development Program (SDP) of the Prosecutor Service for 2012-2014. This Program has been fully implemented.

Currently, GPO of the Republic of Moldova, together with its development partners, ABA ROLI – ABA Rule of Law Initiative, has drafted a new Strategic Development Program for 2016-2018.

The draft of SDP consists of following chapters:

-           Current situation – in which it is described the profile of the authority, and SWAT analysis of strong and weak points, the opportunities and risks which influence institution’s activity;

-           medium-term policy framework, highlighting the priorities of medium-term public policies, taken from public documents approved on national and sectorial level, programs and action-plans for implementation of which is responsible or in which participates the GPO;

-           GPO’s objectivesrelated to GPO’s competences, performance indicators, departments from the GPO responsible for the implementation of the SDP activities, instruments for achievement of the objectives and their time frame.

-           Evaluation and recommendations for development of the capacities, includes the priority capacity needs and recommendations for their fulfillment;

-           Mechanism for monitoring and evaluation describes the tools and procedures used for monitoring, evaluation and reporting of SDP implementation results.

2. – 4.

Pursuant to domestic Law on approval of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy for 2011-2016 which requires creation of an evaluation system of the performances of justice sector actors, based on merit, on clear, objective and transparent criteria, pursuant to Parliament Decision on approval of the Action Plan for the implementation of the Justice Sector Reform Strategy for 2011-2016 which requires creation of a new system of individual and institutional performance indicators, on 11.09.2012 Superior Council of Prosecutor’s, by the Decision nr. 12-211/12, has issued the Regulation on evaluation of professional performances of prosecutors.

According to the Regulation, evaluation of professional performances of prosecutors has as objective establishment of the level of their professional competence, rise of the efficiency of Prosecution Service, maintenance and strengthening of capacities and of the public trust in this law enforcement authority.

To verify fulfillment of professional competence and performance criteria, prosecutors are evaluated on: efficiency of the activity, quality, integrity, continuous professional training.

Regarding leader-prosecutors, evaluation concerns also capacities in organization, coordination, control, adopting decisions, taking responsibilities, quality of activity.

Prosecutors are evaluated:

a)    Periodically – when totalising activity’s results for a certain period of time (quarter, semester, year);

b)    Once in 5 years – when assessing prosecutors in their position (first assessing of prosecutors is made 2 years after appointment, the next one – after 5 years);

c)    When is promoted;

d)    When is proposed for applying stimulation measures for professional merits;

e)    When is called to disciplinary liability for inadequate performance of professional duties.

Assessment of prosecutors in cases b)-e) is carried out by the Qualification Board, instituted by the Decision of the Supreme Council of Prosecutors, the assessment in case a) is carried out by the senior prosecutor.

During assessment, evaluators can consult any kind of evidence, (documents, criminal files), data and information which attests the prosecutor’s activity.

To assess the quality of documents issued by the prosecutor, there are examined 10 procedural documents, other documents and decisions issued by him.

After examination, there is drafted an assessment report which includes information regarding efficiency and quality of the activity, information regarding integrity and continuous training, preliminary findings and recommendations, which realisation will represent a progress in the coming period.

As a result of assessment procedure, Qualification Board, issued the decision: to assess – if the prosecutor corresponds to assessment criteria, or to repeat the assessment procedure – if there is reticence in some areas; or not to assess – which leads to dismissal of the person from the post of prosecutor.

When disagree with the Decisions of the Qualification Board, the interested prosecutor, can challenge it to the Supreme Council of Prosecutors, and afterwards to the court.

5. - 6.

Currently, the Parliament of the Republic of Moldova has approved in firs reading a new Law on Prosecution Service. Pursuant to this draft law, is created a new Specialised Prosecution Office - Prosecution Office on fighting organised crime and special cases.

In the final and transitory provisions of the draft law, it is mentioned the need to draft separate Regulations which will describe the activity of Specialised Prosecution Offices – 1. Anticorruption Prosecution Office and 2. Prosecution Office on fighting organised crime and special cases. These Regulations will describe the specific mechanisms for assessment of specialised prosecutors.

Currently, fighting organised crime is a competence of a specialised department of the GPO, set up by the Decision of the General Prosecutor in 15.10.2013 – Department for investigation of organised crimes and exceptional cases. Within this department work only prosecutors, with no detached staff from the Service for Information and Security or Ministry of Internal Affairs. But fighting with organised crimes and terrorism is made together with the 2 law enforcement authorities mentioned above.

7. We consider that the International Conventions and Treaties, to which Republic of Moldova is part, as well as the cooperation with such agencies as Eurojust, Interpol and Europol, permit to fight efficiently with phenomenon as organised crime and terrorism.

8. In particular cases the problems occur due to execution with delay of the international legal assistance requests.

Monaco

  1. Le ministère public de votre pays travaille-t-il  de manière stratégique pour assurer la qualité du travail des procureurs? Si oui, de quelle manière?

Non. Compte tenu des effectifs du Parquet Général de Monaco (4 magistrats), cela n’est pas nécessaire, la qualité du travail du Parquet étant discutée au cours de réunions hebdomadaires réunissant tous ses membres.

2.         Quels critères sont essentiels dans votre pays pour assurer la plus haute qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs: indépendance, impartialité, ressources humaines et matérielles, conditions de travail, etc.? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

Le ministère public n’est pas indépendant mais l’autorité hiérarchique de laquelle il dépend, le directeur des services judiciaires, n’est pas membre du gouvernement monégasque et ne relève que de l’autorité du Prince Souverain Qui le nomme.

En effet, conformément au principe de la séparation des pouvoirs prévu par la Constitution et appliqué à Monaco, le Directeur des Services Judiciaires ne siège pas au Conseil de Gouvernement. De même, en application de l’article 46 de la Constitution du 17 décembre 1962, modifiée, les ordonnances souveraines concernant les services judiciaires ne font pas l’objet de délibérations en Conseil de Gouvernement mais sont prises par le Prince sur le rapport du Directeur des Services Judiciaires.

Bien que placé sous la direction et le contrôle du Procureur Général, lequel est lui-même placé sous l’autorité du Directeur des Services Judiciaires, chaque magistrat du Parquet dispose d’une entière liberté de parole à l’audience en vertu de l’adage « la plume est serve mais la parole est libre ». Ce statut et cette liberté de parole sont aujourd’hui affirmés par l’article 8 de la loi n° 1.364 du 16 novembre 2009 portant statut de la magistrature.

A noter que les magistrats du Parquet Général font partie intégrante du corps judiciaire et sont régis par le statut de la magistrature qui s’applique tant aux magistrats du siège, juges, qu’aux magistrats du parquet, procureurs.

A ce titre, ils bénéficient des mêmes conditions de recrutement, de nomination, de promotion, de rémunération et de cessation de fonction que les juges.

Ils prêtent le même serment d’entrée en fonction : «Je jure de respecter les institutions de la Principauté et de veiller à la juste application de la loi.

Je jure aussi de remplir mes fonctions en toute impartialité, avec diligence, d’observer les devoirs qu’elles m’imposent, de garder le secret des délibérations et de me conduire en tout comme un digne et loyal magistrat».

Les conditions de service, les règles éthiques et déontologiques, les incompatibilités et les incapacités sont donc identiques pour les magistrats et les procureurs.

Le pouvoir disciplinaire à l'égard des  procureurs, comme des juges, est exercé par le Haut Conseil de la magistrature, sur saisine du Directeur des Services Judiciaires. Le Haut Conseil de la magistrature est alors présidé par le Premier Président de la Cour de révision.

S’agissant des ressources humaines et matérielles, la Direction des Services Judiciaires établit le budget des services judiciaires monégasques. Le budget est ensuite soumis à l’avis technique du Département des Finances et de l’Economie, puis il est soumis à S.A.S. le Prince pour approbation ; le budget des services judiciaires ainsi validé est intégré au budget général de l’Etat. Il est ensuite présenté au vote du Conseil National (Parlement).

La gestion du budget est ensuite assurée par la Direction des Services Judiciaires.

En cas de besoin en ressources humaines et / ou matériels, le Parquet Général se concerte avec la Direction des Services Judiciaires qui prendra toute mesure à sa disposition pour répondre au mieux au bon fonctionnement du ministère public.

S’agissant du système informatique, la Justice dispose d’un serveur informatique indépendant  et d’une ligne budgétaire propre à l’informatique sur laquelle sont prises les dépenses relatives à des logiciels spécifiques, contrats de maintenance et matériels dédiés au fonctionnement de la justice tels que webcams, matériel d’enregistrement pour les auditions de mineurs, vidéoconférence, etc…

Les frais nécessaires au bon fonctionnement des procédures judiciaires sont, autant que faire se peut, engagés à la discrétion du ministère public.

3.         Existe-t-il des indicateurs, formels ou informels, utilisés dans votre pays afin d'évaluer la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs, par exemple, le nombre d'affaires examinées, la durée de l'examen, la complexité des affaires examinées  etc.? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

Le Ministère public dispose d’indicateurs statistiques lui permettant d’évaluer les durées d’examen des procédures comme leur nombre

4.         Existe-t-il une procédure formelle ou informelle pour l'évaluation du travail des procureurs : quelle est la fréquence de l'évaluation, qui fait les évaluations, et avec quelles conséquences? Les procureurs ont-ils le droit de présenter des objections formelles ou informelles concernant les résultats de l'évaluation et de ses conséquences?

En application des dispositions de loi n°1.364 du 16 novembre 2009 portant statut de la magistrature, les magistrats du ministère public sont évalués tous les deux ans de manière contradictoire par le Procureur Général. Ils peuvent faire des observations en cas de désaccord avec l’évaluation.

5.         Concernant la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme, des conditions, critères, procédures ou indicateurs spécifiques sont-ils établis pour les procureurs dans votre pays afin de:

- faciliter leur travail? Oui, notamment au travers de réunions régulières avec les acteurs de la place impliqués dans la lutte contre le blanchiment de capitaux et le financement du terrorisme.

- évaluer leur travail? Il existe des statistiques de suivi de ces procédures.

6.         Y a-t-il dans votre pays des réformes législatives récentes visant à lutter plus efficacement contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme ? Comment ces réformes influencent-elles la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

La loi n° 1.394 du 9 octobre 2012 portant réforme des codes pénal et de procédure pénale en matière de corruption et de techniques spéciales d’enquête  a introduit  dans le droit procédural en matière pénale des outils pour lutter contre la criminalité organisée au titre desquels peuvent être cités les enquêtes discrètes (infiltrations), les sonorisations et les fixations d’images de certains lieux ou véhicules et la possibilité de mettre sur pied des équipes communes d’enquête. Ont également été insérées dans le droit monégasque la possibilité d’effectuer des témoignages anonymes ou d’utiliser la vidéoconférence.

   Ces nouvelles mesures sont destinées à faciliter les enquêtes en matière de délinquance et criminalité organisée en offrant aux organes de poursuite et d’enquête l’opportunité d’utiliser des technologies modernes et d’améliorer l’efficacité des enquêtes.

   Ces mesures étaient également destinées à doter les autorités d’une législation et de moyens techniques performants pour répondre au mieux aux demandes d’entraide judiciaire internationale en matière pénale dans lesquelles l’utilisation de telles techniques seraient sollicitées.

7.         Pensez-vous que les conventions internationales actuelles, ainsi que les organisations internationales comme Eurojust, Europol et Interpol, sont suffisantes pour lutter efficacement contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme?

Oui, à la condition que les pays concernés coopèrent concrètement avec ces organisations.

8.         Quels sont les principaux défis dans votre pays concernant la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs et, en particulier, de la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme?

La qualité  du travail du ministère public dépend essentiellement de la bonne coopération internationale plutôt que de difficultés internes d’ordre juridique ou pratique.


Montenegro / Monténégro

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

First of all there is a clear strategy in the work of the state prosecutor for every single case. Acting of the state prosecutor and phases of the criminal proceedings are prescribed within the Criminal Procedure Code. State prosecutor leads the pre-investigation and investigation phase thus ensuring all the necessary actions are undertaken timely from the moment of commission of the criminal offence until the criminal proceeding.

Concerning organized crime and corruption, due to the special features and complexity of those cases it is established Special Prosecution Office specialized for combating organized crime, high corruption, terrorism and war crimes.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Law on State Prosecution contains provisions on specific criteria for electing state prosecutor for the first time requiring written test and interview on which he/she needs to demonstrate motives, communication skills, ability to make decisions and solve conflicts and understanding of the role of prosecutor in the society. For a state prosecutor who wants advanced position in the service, decisive criteria is results of his/her previous work. Law on State Prosecution prescribes as decisive criteria for electing Head of Prosecutor’s Office is assessment on the proposed plan of work.

On the other side there are clear provisions on assessment  of the work of state prosecutors, criteria on quality and quantity of their work, ability of planning activities, skills for preparing the case, communication skills, ability to adapt to different circumstances in work and participation in different expert activities. 

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

There are special rules for assessment of the work of the state prosecutors and on the work of the Heads of Prosecution Offices in which are contained indicators of criteria and sub criteria on the quality and quantity of the work all followed by clear procedures for the process of assessment.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

        State Prosecutors elected for mandates of 4 years shall be evaluated after 2 years of performing the function as well as on the end of the mandate. All the other prosecutors shall be evaluated every 3 years, with the exception of the state prosecutors working in the Supreme State Prosecutor’s Office.  For that purpose Prosecutorial Council forms a special commission for evaluation, which shall submit proposal of the evaluation to the evaluated prosecutor, who can state its objections to the results. Against the final decision of the commission prosecutor can launch administrative dispute.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

         With separate Law on Special State Prosecution Office (which is competent for cases of organized crime and terrorism) are defined: organization, competence, conditions for election of prosecutors, as well as provisions on cooperation with other institutions in order to facilitate work of prosecutors dealing with such a complex cases. Criteria for evaluation of their work are contained in Law on State Prosecution and are the same as for the other prosecutors.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Since 2010 reforms are being conducted in the area of judiciary. As a result of those reforms in July 2015 is established Special State Prosecution Office. With separate Law on Special State Prosecution Office it is regulated the competence of this Office which is dealing with criminal offences of organized crime, high corruption, terrorism and war crimes. As a result of this change it is increased number of prosecuted persons for those criminal offences. More detailed analysis of the impact of this change will be conducted in due time.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

All the above mentioned instruments we find very efficient. Of course, we also see benefits in establishing more bilateral relations with the Prosecution Offices of the other states and in establishing joint investigative teams. Moreover, it is important to strengthen regional cooperation in Western Balkans and South East Europe.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Organized crime is specific type of crime which often is committed on the territories of a number of states. The other challenges are new technologies for perpetrating the crime, money transfers to off shore destinations with whom it is difficult to establish international legal assistance. Al the acts of organized crime requires timely reaction and requests for international legal assistance. The biggest challenge is tracing illicit money and property and freezing, seizing and confiscation of illegal assets. 


Poland / Pologne

1.      Le ministère public de votre pays travaille-t-il de manière stratégique pour assurer la qualité du travail des procureurs ? Si oui, de quelle manière ?

L’évaluation intérimaire du procureur introduite par la loi de 2011, modifiant la loi relative au ministère public et définie plus en détail par le règlement de 2013 du ministre de la Justice relatif à l’évaluation du travail et à l’élaboration d’un plan personnel de l’évolution professionnelle, ainsi qu’un décret de 2014 relatif à la mise en œuvre de l’évaluation intérimaire des procureurs de tous les échelles du ministère public sont une des formes stratégiques pour assurer la haute qualité du travail des procureurs. L’évaluation intérimaire du procureur a pour objet de stimuler une évolution professionnelle du procureur (une question de l’évaluation intérimaire des procureurs est développée aux points 3 et 4).

Entrant en vigueur le 4 mars prochain, la loi sur le ministère public qui va remplacer la loi sur le parquet actuellement en vigueur ne prévoit pas directement la question de l’évaluation intérimaire des procureurs. On peut s’attendre que l’employeur détermine les questions d’évaluation des procureurs au moyen d’un acte d’exécution.   

   

Dans le contexte des actions stratégiques prises par le ministère public pour assurer la haute qualité du travail des procureurs et la qualité des procédures préliminaires, il y lieu de noter que « La stratégie de la modernisation de l’espace de justice en Pologne dans les années 2014-2020 » a été adoptée. 

Une idée de l’exploitation active d’échanges des données par voie électronique serait à souligner comme un exemple des activités à long terme adoptées dans la stratégie, ayant une influence sur l’amélioration de l’efficacité du travail des procureurs.

Il a été considéré que l’accord conclu entre le ministère de la Justice et le Parquet général en matière d’intégration des réseaux informatiques, d’échange électronique des données enregistrées dans les réseaux informatiques, de digitalisation de dossiers et de réalisation de projets informatiques communs aura, entre autres, pour effet :

- la transmission automatique des données du système de répertoires au ministère public directement à celui des tribunaux et l’importation des données entre ces systèmes sans devoir de les inscrire manuellement ; il s’agit des données concernant des dossiers, des accusations, des témoins,

- la transmission automatique des actes d’accusation et des appels déposés par les paquets par voie électronique,

- la transmission automatique des informations sur les rôles d’audiences, les dates d’audiences et les salles de réunion,

- la transmission automatique des jugements prononcés accompagnés de leurs motivations,

- la transmission aux tribunaux des actes d’accusation accompagnés des dossiers digitalisés de la procédure préliminaire,

- le lancement de l’infrastructure commune ayant pour objet des échanges des données. 

2.             Quels critères sont essentiels dans votre pays pour assurer la plus haute qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs : indépendance, impartialité, ressources humaines et matérielles, conditions de travail, etc.? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

Tous les critères précisés à ce point sont également importants pour assurer la plus haute qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs.

3.             Existe-t-il des indicateurs, formels ou informels, utilisés dans votre pays afin d'évaluer la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs, par exemple, le nombre d'affaires examinées, la durée de l'examen, la complexité des affaires examinées etc. ? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

Oui, il existedes indicateurs formels et informels d’évaluation du travail des procureurs. Plusieurs entités effectuent des évaluations (la nécessité de l’objectivité). Un groupe de visitateurs procède à l’évaluation en examinant 10-15 dossiers des affaires données ; les affaires de différentes catégories devraient se trouver parmi les affaires examinées (indicateur formel). Le procureur peut recommander à examiner deux affaires au maximum. Le supérieur, le collaborateur, l’autoévaluant évaluent de diverses compétences en se basant sur leurs connaissances (indicateur informel). La période du travail du procureur depuis la dernière évaluation, n’excédant pas 4 ans, est visée par cette évaluation. Lors des formulations des évaluations, l’évaluateur est tenu de tenir compte de l’intensification de la charge de travail, la complexité des affaires examinées et les conditions du travail du procureur (indicateur formel). 

            Le Procureur général a réglé par ses ordonnances, la procédure de collecte et traitement des données de déclaration et statistiques fournissant des données objectives améliorant l’évaluation du travail du procureur sous l’angle de la quantité et la complexité des affaires dont il est chargé.         

4.             Existe-t-il une procédure formelle ou informelle pour l'évaluation du travail des procureurs : quelle est la fréquence de l'évaluation, qui fait les évaluations, et avec quelles conséquences ? Les procureurs ont-ils le droit de présenter des objections formelles ou informelles concernant les résultats de l'évaluation et de ses conséquences?

Il existe une procédure formelle pour l'évaluation du travail des procureurs. En vertu des dispositions de la loi en vigueur, l’efficacité de la mise en œuvre des tâches et les compétences professionnelles du procureur font l’objet de son évaluation intérimaire. L’évaluation personnelle est établie au cours de la visite effectuée tous les quatre ans. Le plan personnel de l’évolution professionnelle préparé, en s’appuyant sur l’évaluation faite, est établi pour une période d’au moins de quatre ans. Par contre, le règlement du ministre de la Justice règlemente la manière dont l’évaluation intérimaire du travail est effectuée.

L’évaluation du travail du procureur est effectuée par le procureur supérieur hiérarchique qui tient compte de :

- l’évaluation du supérieur du procureur soumis à l’évaluation,

- l’évaluation du groupe de visitateurs chargés de visiter une entité organisationnelle de parquet où le procureur soumis à l’évaluation exerce ou bien exerçait ses fonctions dans la période couverte par la visite.  

Dans les quinze jours suivant le moment où le procureur a pris connaissance des résultats de son évaluation, il a le droit de formuler des observations accompagnées de la motivation. L’unité chargée de l’évaluation prend connaissance de ces observations, ce qui peut avoir pour effet la confirmation de l’évaluation ou bien sa modification.

5.             Concernant la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme, des conditions, critères, procédures ou indicateurs spécifiques sont-ils établis pour les procureurs dans votre pays afin de :

- faciliter leur travail ?

- évaluer leur travail ?

Actuellement, il n’existe pas de conditions, procédures ou indicateurs spécifiques facilitant ou consistant à évaluer le travail des procureurs chargés de la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme. Les critères ordinaires d’évaluation sont applicables à ce groupe de procureurs. Entrant en vigueur le 4 mars prochain, la loi nouvelle sur le ministère public introduit des modifications importantes à la cadre organisationnel des entités du ministère public chargées de la lutte contre le crime organisé. On peut s’attendre que ces modifications aient leurs conséquences, s’il s’agit les évaluations du travail des procureurs exerçant leurs fonctions au sein de ces entités organisationnelles. 

6.             Y a-t-il dans votre pays des réformes législatives récentes visant à lutter plus efficacement contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme ? Comment ces réformes influencent-elles la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs ? Veuillez décrire brièvement.

(cf. point 5)

7.             Pensez-vous que les conventions internationales actuelles, ainsi que les organisations internationales comme Eurojust, Europol et Interpol, sont suffisantes pour lutter efficacement contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme ?

En Pologne, on note un nombre assez limité de procédures dans le cadre de la lutte contre le terrorisme - quatre enquêtes en 2015. On peut donc considérer qu’au vu de notre faible expérience dans la lutte contre le terrorisme, il ne nous appartient pas de formuler des avis en ce qui concerne l’efficacité des conventions internationales et l’efficacité de la collaboration avec des organisations internationales dans la lutte contre le terrorisme au niveau judiciaire. Cela n’exclut pas de considérer souhaitable la ratification du Protocole additionnel à la Convention du Conseil de l’Europe pour la prévention du terrorisme que la Pologne a signé en date du 22 octobre 2015. Pour ce qui est de la lutte contre le crime organisé, les conventions internationales, ainsi que la collaboration avec les organisations mentionnées au point 7 et notamment celle avec Eurojust sont un outil suffisant et efficace.  

8.             Quels sont les principaux défis dans votre pays concernant la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs et, en particulier, de la lutte contre le crime organisé et le terrorisme ? 

Le principal défi concernant la qualité et l'efficacité du travail des procureurs est l’efficience de procédures menées, tout en assurant les garanties procédurales des parties de ces procédures. Les procureurs chargés des procédures dans le cadre de la lutte contre le crime organisé et la lutte contre le terrorisme font face aux mêmes défis. Par ailleurs, la collaboration internationale combinée avec l’échange d’information, le développement et le suivi de formation spécialisée pour les procureurs chargés de pareilles enquêtes sont également le défi et doivent être développés pour lutter contre ces deux fléaux.  


Portugal

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Yes. The procedure can briefly be described as follows: first, there is a phase of definition of strategic objectives, followed by a definition of procedural objectives and of projects to pursue the fulfilment of the strategic objectives. Finally, there is a phase of monitoring and evaluation of results.

Thus, every three years, the Prosecutor-General’s Office defines strategic objectives in four major areas: priority areas of intervention, quality of performance, procedural promptness and organisational quality.

On the basis of the objectives thus outlined, annual strategic objectives are defined in July. Every department of the Public Prosecution Service (not only the 23 local “Procuradorias da República” - District Prosecutors’ Offices, into which the national territory is divided, but also central departments, namely the Central Department of Criminal Investigation and Prosecution – DCIAP, which deals with the most serious type of criminality) must accordingly define, also on an annual basis, in September, projects and local procedural objectives which are then submitted for approval to the Prosecutor-General’s Office.

For the triennium 2015-2018, the following strategic areas were defined by the Prosecutor General:

Priority areas: Corruption and economic and financial criminality (by adopting a Plan of the Public Prosecution Service against corruption), Domestic violence, Cybercrime and digital proof, Terrorism, Recovery of assets, Protection of the victims, Rights of children and youth, Rights of the elderly, Environment and urbanism, Rights of the consumers, Rights of workers, Human rights.

Quality of performance: Promotion of equality of citizens before the law, Integrated conception of the intervention of the Public Prosecution in the different procedural stages and jurisdictions, Coordination of the intervention among different jurisdictions, Strengthening the effective direction of the inquiry, Coordination with Criminal Police and law enforcement agencies and other entities, Quality in public attendance, Simplification and clarity of the intervention of the Public Prosecution, Valuing the intervention of Public Prosecution during the trial stage, International judicial cooperation and Cooperation with other legal professions.

Procedural promptness: Timely decision on the merits, Accessibility in public attendance

Organisational quality: Communication policy, Public Prosecution Service’s portal/Homepage of the district court and Press Office, Human resources training, Adequate deployment of human resources as regards the activity of Public Prosecution, Financial and administrative autonomy, Harmonisation of procedures and of registration criteria, Improvement of information technologies and support technologies as regards the activity of Public Prosecution.

Once the objectives have been homologated, the “Procuradorias da República” are responsible for the execution of the proposed projects and for the preparation both of a biannual, as well as of an annual report, for the purpose of assessing to what extent these objectives have been met, the measures that were adopted thereto and amendments to be proposed.

Reports thus submitted are then evaluated by the Prosecutor-General’s Office to serve as a basis for the definition of the objectives for the following year.

 

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Being autonomy, both internal and external, as well as impartiality, fundamental values of the activity of the Public Prosecution Service, criteria adopted to evaluate the quality and efficiency of professional conduct of prosecutors are related to the degree of fulfilment of proposed and homologated objectives on an annual basis, namely:

a) Evaluation of the degree of fulfilment and of the efficiency of coordination mechanisms among jurisdictions and with external entities, involving coordination meetings, sharing of best practices and setting-up of contact networks with court auxiliaries.

b) Evaluation of the degree of fulfilment of objectives in terms of reduction in the duration of proceedings relating specifically to the Public Prosecution, reduction of pendencies and degree of success of the activity of the Public Prosecution during the trial stage.

c) Evaluation of adequate deployment of human and material resources in view of coping with the service volumes of each one of the departments of the Public Prosecution Service.

As regards a general qualitative monitoring, the coordinating prosecutors of the 23 “Procuradorias da República” have to inform the Prosecutor-General’s Office, in their annual reports, of the general quality of the activity performed by the Public Prosecution, as evaluated by the members of the Public Prosecution themselves, as well as by the general public, pointing out, whenever necessary, measures to improve it.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

There are indeed statistical indicators to assess the quantity and quality of the work performed by Portuguese public prosecutors.

Regarding criminal investigation cases, there are indeed data available defining, for a specific time period:

-          The number of cases lodged,

-          The number of cases brought to a close,

-          Of these cases, the number of cases leading to accusation or to dismissal, and those where one of the simplified and consensual forms of proceedings, as laid down in the Criminal Procedure Code – sumário (summary proceeding), sumaríssimo (highly summarised proceeding), abreviado (shortened proceeding) and suspensão provisória do processo (provisional suspension of criminal proceedings) –, was used.

There is also an overall control of all criminal inquiries highlighting those where a criminal investigation took longer than 8 months.

Finally, it is possible to ascertain the number of lodged and closed cases according to the complexity and type of crime and how many of them were against unknown perpetrators.

Regarding the areas of representation by the Public Prosecution Service, be it in criminal, civil, commerce, family and children or labour cases, available statistical data allow to determine the number of lodged and closed cases (even if in some of these jurisdictions there might not have been the intervention of a public prosecutor), as well as the number of appeals lodged by the Public Prosecution Service or the number of appeals to which the PPS had to reply.

In these areas (with the exception of criminal cases), there are indicators available allowing to determine how many actions were instituted by the Public Prosecution Service.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

District prosecutors and deputy district prosecutors are periodically evaluated on their functional performance and merit.

These inspections have a formal character (they are defined on an annual basis by the High Council of the Public Prosecution Service, who decides, on the basis of pre-defined objective criteria, who shall be the prosecutors to be inspected) and they take place approximately every 6 years in respect of each prosecutor.

To conduct such inspections, there is a team composed of 15 inspectors, all of them members of the Public Prosecution Service.

As a consequence of the inspection, the performance of a member of the Public Prosecution Service, according to his/her merit, is to be evaluated with Very good, Good with distinction, Good, Sufficient and Insufficient.

This evaluation is relevant for career advancement of prosecutors, be it for transfer or eventual promotion, situations to be assessed on the occasion of every annual move of public prosecutors.

The evaluation as Insufficient implies the suspension from duties of the relevant prosecutor and the undertaking of an inquiry as to whether the person is unfit for the office.

The criteria for the evaluation of public prosecutors, as well as the definition of the degree of functional performance corresponding to each one of the classifications above mentioned, are laid down in the Statute of the Public Prosecution Service and in the Regulation on the Inspections of the Public Prosecution Service and they are, of course, public.

Once the inspection regarding the performance of a public prosecutor is concluded, the inspector draws up a report in which he/she describes, in a concrete manner, the work carried out by the inspected prosecutor, and proposes an evaluation.

Such report is, initially, only submitted to the inspected prosecutor, who has then the possibility, if he/she so wishes, to reply within 15 days.

After the expiry of such period, and if a reply has been produced by the inspected prosecutor, the inspector may make his/her remarks, but shall not refer to new facts that are disadvantageous to the prosecutor concerned (the concerned prosecutor shall be informed of such remarks) and shall then submit the whole inspection proceedings to the High Council of the Public Prosecution Service.

If however no reply is produced by the prosecutor subject to inspection, the inspector submits the inspection proceedings without delay to the High Council of the Public Prosecution Service.

The inspection proceedings, composed by all the elements collected by the inspector, along with the final report and the eventual reply of the inspected prosecutor, are to be considered in a meeting of the Disciplinary Section of the High Council of the Public Prosecution Service (composed by a certain number of members of this Council), in which a written and reasoned decision shall be issued granting an evaluation to the inspected prosecutor (not necessarily coincident with the one proposed by the inspector). 

Should the inspected prosecutor disagree with the evaluation given to him/her, he/she may react lodging an appeal before the plenary of the High Council of the Public Prosecution Service (as such, composed by all its members) and later on, lodge an appeal concerning the decision rendered by the High Council of the PPS before the Supreme Administrative Court.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

        - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

Normally, the most complex cases of organised crime and also terrorist cases are dealt with by DCIAP, which is a Department within the Prosecutor-General’s Office that centralizes these cases, and has competence all over the Portuguese Territory, so this kind of specialization may be considered as a specific condition aiming at facilitating prosecutorial work in this area and allowing for best results.

Evaluation of prosecutorial work is achieved through general periodic inspections regarding each prosecutor working in DCIAP, and there is, moreover, an annual information/evaluation produced by the Director of DCIAP on each of the prosecutors he works with.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Portugal has adopted several domestic laws on such matters, namely according to UE recommendations and UN Security Council Resolutions.

For example, at present, Portugal criminalises terrorist financing as a stand-alone offence under its Anti-Terrorism Law (Law 52/2003, last amended by Law 60/2015), which has been in force in its present form as of June 2015.

Mention should, however, be also made to the following legislation:

-          Law nr. 25/2008, establishing measures of a preventive and repressive nature to fight against money laundering and terrorism financing;

-          Law nr. 53/2008, Law on Domestic Security;

-          Law nr. 17/2011, criminalizing public provocation to commit a terrorist offence, recruitment for terrorism and training for terrorism, in compliance with Framework Decision nr. 2008/919/JAI, amending Law nr. 52/2003 (Anti-Terrorism Law).

As far as training and conduct duties of public prosecutors are concerned, there are no exceptions for the treatment of suspects or accused person regarding acts of terrorism or highly organized crime vis-à-vis other forms of criminality.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

All the above mentioned international organisations continue to play a very important role to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism, but there still remains much to be done regarding international harmonisation of domestic laws, either within the European Union or within the Council of Europe, for example regarding disclosure of evidence, forms of evidence that can be used in court, legal competences for prosecutors and Judges, and related areas. 

This harmonisation is very difficult to achieve for obvious reasons, and so has been gradually pursued, namely inside the EU, on a step by step approach.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

The major challenges are probably:

a) The constant need to pursue specialization inside the Public Prosecution Service, but also the need to share information and good practices with prosecutors and judges from other jurisdictions within either the European Union or the Council of Europe;

b) Establishing, on a case by case evaluation, the necessary confidence and trust allowing for the success of International Cooperation requests and transnational investigations;

c) Understanding the constant changes occurring in terrorist and organised crime groups and their modus operandi


Romania / Roumanie

1.    The Public Ministry organizes work meetings, conferences, seminars on a regular basis, prosecutors being invited to participate in training courses. The Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice (POHCCJ) elaborates, with the support and involvement of prosecutors at all levels guides, manuals, syntheses of legal issues, study notes, guidance lines etc. They are subsequently disseminated to all prosecution units, including by publication on the website of the Public Ministry. Work groups are also set up which should monitor essential issues linked to the activity of prosecutors or draft proposals in relation to aspects they are interested in.

There is a section of Human Resources and Documentation within the POHCCJ and, by means of the new Internal Regulations for public prosecutor’s offices, published in August 2014, a new structure under the subordination of the prosecutor general was set up and became operational: the Service of Guidance and Control. Among its responsibilities you’ll also find centralization, analysis of data and information resulted from coordination and control actions, identification of deficiencies, issuance of recommendations meant to remedy them.

2.    In Romania, prosecutors have a statute of magistrates and they are part of the judicial power. According to the Law on the statute of judges and prosecutors, prosecutors shall be appointed by the President of Romania, they enjoy stability and they are independent, under the law. The guarantor of the independence of justice is the Superior Council of Magistracy.

The judge or prosecutor who considers that his/her independence, impartiality or professional reputation is in any way affected can address to the Superior Council of Magistracy which, as the case may be, may order verification of the questions raised, publication of its results, it may notify the competent authority to decide as to the required measures or may order any other kind of adequate measure, according to the law. On the other hand, the Deontological code of judges and prosecutors stipulates that judges and prosecutors are bound to defend the independence of justice, to exercise their function objectively and impartially, abiding solely           by the law, without acceding to pressures or influences of any kind.

In the month of July 2015, a work group was set up within the POHCCJ so as to analyze and identify solutions for enhancing the efficiency and performance in the activity of the Public Ministry, the opportunity to modify the system of organization and substantiation of the lines of action to this end.

Also, in compliance with the Judicial system development strategy 2015-2020, a series of measures are taken into consideration for the creation and implementation of a unitary system for strategic management of the judicial system, optimization of the organization and functioning of courts of law and prosecutor’s offices, strengthening of the administrative capacity of courts of law and prosecutor’s offices (by improvement of the infrastructure, finalization of the computerization process, development of the electronic documents management system, revision of the judicial map, development of a policy of human resources for the judicial system), consolidation of integrity within the judicial system by promotion of anticorruption measures and professional and ethical standards, improvement of the quality of the judicial process by reducing the duration of judicial proceedings, unification of judicial practice, interdisciplinary professional training of those involved in accomplishing the judicial process etc.

3.    The evaluation of the professional performances of prosecutors is conducted according to the efficiency and quality of their activity, their integrity and manner of compliance with the obligations to undergo professional training and graduate from specialization courses.

The efficiency of the activity shall be assessed taking into account:

§  the performance of the criminal investigation within a reasonable span of time, considering the complexity of the case (difficulty in gathering the evidence, number of parties and witnesses, number of offenses under investigation, their nature, difficulty of the legal and factual issues which must be settled, joinder of several cases, other relevant specific elements) and the workload of the prosecutor – in case of prosecutors who conduct their own criminal investigations;

§  the control and guidance of police authorities in their activity of criminal investigation, reflected in the periodic and rhythmical verification of the stage and quality of the criminal investigation actions performed by police and complying with the due dates, as well as in taking the legal measures in case of failure to accomplish or faulty accomplishment by the criminal investigation authority of the orders issued by the prosecutor, the drafting of the procedural documents and settlement of cases within a reasonable span of time, depending on the complexity of the case and the workload of the prosecutor – in case of prosecutors who supervise the criminal investigation activity;

§  effectiveness in motivating the legal remedies one filed for, with the observance of the legal and administrative periods and effectiveness in solving other tasks, specific to the judicial activity – in case of prosecutors who sit in court sessions;

§  effectiveness in solving the tasks, with the observance of the legal and administrative periods taking into consideration the workload of the prosecutor for the period under evaluation and the workload of the sector in which he/she carries out his/her activity - in case of prosecutors who conduct other activities than criminal investigation, supervising the investigations or sitting in court sessions.

The quality of the activity shall be assessed according to:

§  the measures and solutions imputable to the prosecutor, for reasons of unlawfulness existent when the prosecutor took the measure or issued the order;

§  the quality of the redaction and motivation of the solutions or of the legal remedies, capacity to interpret the evidence, quality of wording, spirit of synthesis, accuracy of judicial reasoning, rigour in laying out the facts, legal remedies the parties were allowed to on grounds of unlawfulness in the cases in which the prosecutor didn’t resort to legal remedies, remedies not filed for for reasons imputable to the prosecutor, withdrawn or dismissed for reasons of unlawfulness imputable to the prosecutor.

4.    The evaluation of the Romanian magistrates is laid down under the Law on the statute of judges and prosecutors and it is regulated by decisions of the Superior Council of Magistracy for the approval of the Regulations and the Professional Activity Evaluation Guide for Magistrates.

The evaluation of prosecutors is conducted by commissions established by decision of the Superior Council of Magistracy, made up of the head of the unit, 2 prosecutors appointed by the steering college and one or two substitute members.

In order to verify the compliance with the professional competence and performance criteria, prosecutors are subject, every 3 years, to an evaluation in relation to their efficiency, quality of activity and integrity, obligation to undergo continuous professional training and graduation from specialized courses. In case of prosecutors appointed to management positions, the evaluation shall also take into account the manner in which they accomplished their managerial tasks.

The evaluation commission compiles an evaluation dossier for each prosecutor, a dossier which comprises statistical data on their workload and efficiency indicators which are filed on a yearly basis, the self-assessment report, the evaluation report, the observations and objections of the person subject to evaluation, together with any other documents, data or information the evaluation is based upon. As the case may be, the evaluation dossier will also enclose the individual plan for professional development as well.

Prosecutors shall have access to their own evaluation dossier at any point.

The president of the evaluation commission shall take the measures necessary to store the evaluation dossier, so that its confidentiality be assured.

During the period subject to evaluation, the evaluation commission, if they deem as necessary to remove certain deficiencies found in the performed activity, they can issue recommendations to the evaluated prosecutor, with a view to improving his/her activity, and draw up a minutes of proceedings to this end. The minutes of proceedings shall be brought to the knowledge of the evaluated prosecutor who, under his/her own signature, can issue observations as to the aspects revealed.

Prosecutors are invited to fill in a self-assessment sheet in which they can issue their own opinions as to the activity performed throughout the period subject to evaluation, giving motivated points to each indicator, this having the role of allowing the prosecutor to have a position in relation to his/her activity, including from the viewpoint of the need for professional training.

Upon request of the evaluated prosecutor or in case the evaluation commission deems it as necessary, an evaluation interview will be organized.

The evaluation report shall be done every 3 years, it is confidential, it shall be drafted separately for every prosecutor, on account of the documents enclosed to the evaluation dossier, after which it shall be communicated to the person concerned.

If unhappy with the grade they received, prosecutors can challenge the report before the Section for prosecutors within the Superior Council of Magistracy no later than 30 days from the date they were notified.

The decision delivered by the Section can be challenged before the Plenum of the Superior Council of Magistracy no later than 5 days from its receipt.

The decision of the Plenum is final and irrevocable.

5.    In the organization of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice there is the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism (DIICOT), set up in 2004 as an autonomous structure, with its own judicial personality and its own budget. The DIICOT is the sole structure of the Public Ministry competent and specialized in the fight against and investigation of the offences of organized crime and terrorism, and it aims at dismantling the organized, border and cross-border criminal groups.

Prosecutors who carry out their activity within this directorate are appointed by order of the prosecutor general of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, after receiving the approval of the Superior Council of Magistracy, without exceeding the number of positions set in the staff establishment and approved under the law.

In order to be appointed to the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism, prosecutors must show good professional training, an irreproachable moral conduct, a tenure of at least 6 years of service in the position of prosecutor or judge and they should have been accepted by the interviewing commission.

All prosecutors who meet the conditions abovementioned can take part in the interview.

The interview consists in checking the professional training, the capacity to make decisions and take responsibility, resistance to stressful conditions, as well as other specific qualities.

In evaluating the applicants the commission takes into consideration the activities carried out by the prosecutor, knowledge of a foreign language, computer literacy.

The commission is appointed by order of the prosecutor general of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice and it is made up of 3 prosecutors working for the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism. Specialists in psychology, human resources and others fields can also be members of the commission.

The prosecutor general of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice evaluates, on a yearly basis, the results achieved by the prosecutors working for the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism.

Prosecutors appointed to the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism can be revoked by order of the prosecutor general of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice, after receipt of the approval from the Superior Council of Magistracy, for inappropriate fulfilling of the tasks specific to their position or as result of a disciplinary sanction being enforced.

For financing its current and capital expenses, the DIICOT has its own budget, the funds which it benefits from being distinctly outlined in the budget of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice.

By virtue of its law on organization and functioning, a yearly deposit amounting to 1,000,000 lei (the equivalent of approximately 220,000 euros) is made for actions meant to organize and detect offenses in flagrante delicto or which are triggered by the use of under cover investigators, of informants or their collaborators; it’s the head prosecutor of the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism the one who decides, by way of an order he/she issues, of the manner in which the money is managed and used.

As regards the organization of the directorate, it has, beside its central structure seated in Bucharest, a number of 15 territorial services and 27 territorial bureaus, covering all the counties the country is divided into. The central structure has services specialized in investigating the main types of offenses the organized criminal phenomenon consists of.

In order to clarify few aspects pertaining to technical or specialized aspects linked to the activity of criminal investigation, the DIICOT has a corps of specialists, experts in processing and turning to account information from fields such as economy, banking, customs, information technology, and other fieldsas well. They are appointed, by order of the head prosecutor of the Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism, after receiving the approval of the line ministers.

The criminal investigation in the cases falling under the competence of the DIICOT is mandatorily, under the law in accordance with which the directorate functions, conducted by the prosecutor. The judicial police officers and agents, specially appointed under the provisions of the same law, conduct only actions of criminal investigation ordered by the DIICOT prosecutors, under their close coordination and direct control. The judicial police officers and agents who carry out their activity under the coordination of DIICOT prosecutors are nominally appointed by the Ministry of Administration and Interior, after receiving the analogous approval of the prosecutor general of the Prosecutor’s Office attached to the High Court of Cassation and Justice.

As regards the evaluation of the activity of the DIICOT prosecutors, it is not conducted in accordance with specific procedures, but by taking into consideration the general evaluation criteria applicable to all prosecutors working for the Public Ministry. There aren’t any distinct indicators for the DIICOT prosecutors, although this aspect might be subject to an analysis considering the peculiarities of the investigations against organized crime.

Starting from March 2015, the central structure of the DIICOT has its own headquarters.

6.      The tasks, competence, structure, organization and functioning of the

Directorate for the Investigation of Organized Crime and Terrorism are established by a special law, adopted in 2004 and modified several times, the last modification dating back to 2014.

On the other hand, the new Criminal Code and the new Code of Criminal Procedure came into effect on February the 1st 2014. As it dealt with a reform of the entire criminal justice system, it goes without saying that essential modifications were operated in the field of the fight against organized crime and terrorism as well.

The recital of the draft law drawn up for enforcing the new Criminal Code, details the goals pursued by adopting this normative documents:

-         setting up a coherent legislative framework in criminal matter, by avoiding the overlapping of norms in force existent in the previous Criminal code and in the special laws,

-         simplifying the regulations on substantive law,

-         providing compliance with the requirements which derive from the fundamental principles of criminal law enshrined in the Constitution and in the agreements and treaties on fundamental human rights to which Romania adhered,

-         transposing the EU regulations in the national criminal legislative framework,

-         harmonizing the Romanian material criminal law with the systems of the other EU Member States, as a premise for judicial cooperation in criminal matter based on mutual recognition and trust.

In a similar manner, with regard to the new Code of criminal procedure, the legislator states the following objectives:

-         setting up a legislative framework in which the criminal trial should be quicker and more effective,

-         unitary protection of the human rights and liberties enshrined in the Constitution and the international judicial instruments,

-         conceptual harmonization with the provisions of the new Criminal code,

-         adequate regulation of international obligations our country adhered to,

-         establishing an appropriate balance between the requirements for an effective criminal procedure, protection of elementary procedural rights and also of fundamental human rights for the parties involved in the criminal trial and unitary observance of the principles related to a fair trial.

The objectives pursued were partially attained; but after the two codes became effective a series of issues unanticipated in the preliminary studies also came to light. There are certain provisions in the two normative documents which were subject to decisions delivered by the Constitutional Court, namely they were declared as being incongruous with the fundamental law.

7.    Both international conventions and international organizations are useful, even indispensable, in the fight against organized crime and terrorism. A thorough analysis of the current instruments may be required so as to avoid their overlapping and/or to adopt documents containing more specific provisions that should facilitate the work of practitioners.

Their better dissemination for practitioners to get better acquainted with the possibilities to use them is also essential.

Eurojust, Europol and Interpol are extremely efficient institutions, set up so as to facilitate international cooperation of judicial authorities and police in the fight against serious crime. Materialization of the project for an Office of the European Prosecutor is also necessary, as it would be more capable of concentrating, at a supranational level, the efforts of the judicial authorities of the EU Member States in fighting the crimes against the Community budget, as well as other very serious offenses.

In order to efficiently fight organized crime and terrorism it would be necessary for all States to agree upon performing systematic strategic analyses of the phenomena, that should be made available to the relevant national authorities.

8.    The main challenges are linked to the workload and the frequency of the legislative modifications. 

In relation to the fight against organized crime, it would be necessary to set up a national mechanism for the evaluation of risks and menaces.

It would also be extremely useful, for increasing reaction efficiency, that DIICOT should have its own judicial police, following the pattern of the prosecutor’s office specialized in the fight against corruption (DNA).

Financial investigations, especially in the process of identification and seizure of the proceeds of crime with a view to confiscation, are still a field in which capacity of action needs improvement.


Russian Federation / Fédération de Russie

Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Yes, the Russian Prosecution Service carries out such work. This work is articulated around the following key pillars:

-         Improvement of training, professional development, fostering and placement of the staff;

-         Increasing the efficiency of organizational and analytical work in the prosecution bodies; development of assessment criteria and regular evaluation of the quality of the prosecutorial work, the level of its compliance with the tasks and challenges the modern Russian society is facing now and in the strategic long-term vision (holding colleges, coordination meetings, annual summarizing of the results and so on);

-         formulating the aims in the area of improving the efficiency of prosecutorial activities in various regulation and management documents and strategies for the development of the Prosecution Service;

-         development of the system of overseeing the prosecutorial activities, by introducing a system of key performance indicators, which includes  the assessment of: a) public satisfaction with the prosecutorial activities; b) efficiency of organization of internal processes and procedures; c) development of prosecutors and d) financial costs;

-          improvement of the system of periodic prosecutors’ attestation;

-         raising the quality of methodological work;

-         improvement of the system of motivation of the prosecutor’s activities, including both financial and non-financial (moral) incentives for prosecutors to foster their conscientious and good work, and application of disciplinary measures to prosecutors for inappropriate fulfilment of their obligations.

1)    Work on training, qualification development, fostering and placement of the staff

The work on  forming a highly professional prosecutors’ corps is carried out in accordance with the provisions of Federal laws No.2201-1  of 17.01.1992 “On the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”, No.79-FZ of 27.07.2004  “On the State Civil Service of the Russian Federation”, No.273-FZ 25.12.2008 “On Countering Corruption” and with the General Principles of Official Conduct of Civil Servants, approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No.885 of 12.08.2002, and the requirements of regulatory and administrative documents of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

Pursuant to paragraph 1 of Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No.80 of 20.02.2013 “On the Main Areas of Work with the Staff in the Bodies and Institutions of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation” such work with the staff is viewed as one of the main instruments of raising the effectiveness of the activities  of the prosecution system at the present stage.

The system of training and qualification development of prosecutors

Article 43.5 of the Federal law “On the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation” stipulates that the professional training of the staff for the Prosecution Service is performed in scientific and educational institutions of the Prosecution Service, and in other educational institutions including on the basis of an agreement on the prosecutor’s office-sponsored admission and (or) agreement on targeted education for the Prosecution Service, signed in accordance with the legislation of the Russian Federation.

Besides, the training of prosecutors under the program of post-graduate preparation of scientific and teaching staff with full-time attendance is carried out in scientific and educational institutions of the Prosecution Service.

Order of the Prosecutor General No.373 of 04.10.2010 (with amendments as of 03.09.2012) “On Improvement of the System of Professional Training, Qualification Development and Professional Re-Training of Prosecutors in the Russian Federation” provides that the key aims of professional training include fostering of professional-psychological qualities and skills of prosecutors which are necessary for successful addressing concrete practical tasks, improvement of the style and methods of work of the chief officials of the prosecution service with regard to management, training and fostering of the subordinate staff, introducing in practice  new forms and methods of work, foundations of scientific management of work, promotion in service (paragraph 1.4).

At present the system of professional training of the staff for the Prosecution Service includes:

-         the education of students in the Academy of the Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation (hereinafter referred as the “Academy”) and in its institutes (branches), and also in the institutes of the Prosecution Service within some educational institutions of higher education (hereinafter refeeres as the “Educational institutions”);

-         training of young specialists in interregional centers of professional training;

-         trainees at the faculties of the Academy and at its institutes (branches) implementing the advance development  and professional in-training  programs;

-         participation of prosecutors and civil servants in the work of conferences, seminars conducted on a permanent basis, practical training in structural subdivisions of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, subdivisions of prosecutor’s offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, prosecutor’s offices of an equivalent status, the use of preceptorship and  self-education in accordance with individual plans.

Each element of this system has its peculiarities.

First, the distinguishing feature  of students’ training in accordance with programs of higher education at the law faculty of the Academy, at Law Institutes (branches) of the Academy in Irkutsk, Crimea and Saint-Petersburg, in three Prosecutor’s Institutes which were established in accordance with the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation  within Kutafin Moscow State Law University named after O. Kutafin, and Urals State Law University (the city of Ekaterinburg), and in Saratov State Law Academy, is the prosecutor-oriented training program, introduction of special subjects and courses addressing prosecutorial issues, individual approach to students, permanent appraisal of their personal and business qualities. The Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation and the above institutions signed agreements providing both for education and employment of those graduates who were enrolled on condition of their future recruitment in prosecutor’s offices. Moreover, prosecutor-oriented training of a small group of law specialists for the prosecution system is performed at the law faculty of Lomonosov Moscow State University.

It is noteworthy that in order to become students those who are going to study under prosecutor-oriented program participate in general competitive selection of applicants. This entails additional responsibilities for the personnel departments of the prosecutor’s offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation related to the organization quality selection of the candidates entering the education institutions who are willing to serve in the Prosecution System and who meet health requirements for such service.

At present prospective students are obliged to go through professional psychological screening (test) during which the candidate’s individual and other qualities required for prosecutorial activities are identified.

The referrals are issued by the prosecutor’s offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation for entering the academic institutions which provide prosecution-sponsored training of students for the Prosecution Service only upon careful examination of business and personal qualities of prospective students.

The personnel departments of such prosecutor’s offices cooperate with the deanery and curators of study groups throughout the whole training period.

Second, the number of specialists trained in the framework of targeted education, does not fully meet the prosecution system’s need for personnel[2]. At present the staff for the prospection service is, for the most part, selected from the graduates of other academic institutions.

In this connection such young specialists (prosecutors with work experience up to three years), in accordance with the prescribed procedure, are accordingly  trained in interregional centers of professional training which are established in the prosecutor’s offices of the Khabarovsk territory, the Sverdlovsk and Saratov regions, and in Saint-Petersburg.

Third, prosecutorial staff participate in permanent seminars of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation and some of its structural subdivisions, the Academy, departments of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation in federal districts, prosecutor’s offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and prosecutor’s offices of an equivalent status. For example, sessions on countering corruption were held with participation of the specialists from the Russian Ministry of Labour and the Academy, in February 2016.

Fourth, prosecutorial staff with more than three years’ work experience usually raise their professional qualification once in every five years in the institutes of the Academy.

Quite often, the training sessions (lectures, seminars, professional simulation exercises) are attended, together with professors and teachers of the institutes of the Academy, by the heads of structural divisions of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, prosecutor’s offices of the constituent entities and the prosecutor’s offices of an equivalent status.

Prosecutorial staff and civil servants of the Prosecution Service also raise their professional level in the Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration. In 2014, in particular, the prosecutors of the prosecutor’s offices of the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol received training in this Academy.

Fifth, a person before being appointed to the position of a city, district or special prosecutor is obliged to receive training at the Academy or at its institutes (branches) under the professional retraining program.

The education under this program aims to train members of the prosecutor’s office included in the staff reserve for prospective promotion to the positions of city and district prosecutors and prosecutors of an equivalent status who faithfully fulfil the responsibilities imposed on them and possess the necessary professional expertise and practical experience, organizational skills and appropriate moral qualities for carrying out a new professional activity. The graduates who had been trained under this program should conform to the qualification requirements for the position of city and district prosecutors and prosecutors of an equivalent status.

Sixth, practical training of respective prosecutorial staff is conducted in the structural subdivisions of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, in prosecutor’s offices of the RF constituent entities and in prosecutor’s offices of a similar status with a view to raising their professional level. Such training is carried out on the basis of special plans which address the need of the workers for acquiring concrete skills of documents preparation, learning prosecutorial and judicial practice, getting deeper knowledge in other areas of prosecutorial activities.

The practical training ends with obligatory interview with the head of the division where the person had been on probation. According to the results of the probation a final reference is issued reflecting the professional, business and personal qualities of the worker who had been on probation.

Seventh, such form of qualification development as preceptorship (that is a  more experienced worker being assigned as a mentor for a young prosecutor). Preceptorship is considered a traditional form of educational work which has a positive fostering effect on the young generation. The guided persons study the decisions of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation, European Court of Human Rights, plenums of the Supreme Court of the Russian Federation, orders of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, decisions of the Collegium of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, methodological recommendations, information letters.

The eighthelement of the system of special training of personnel is dissertation researches on obtaining academic degrees of candidates and PHDs[3] by the prosecutors showing abilities for scientific and pedagogical scientific activity. The personnel divisions of the Prosecution Service study the professional level of the staff with a view to identifying prosecutors who possess abilities for scientific and scientific-pedagogical activity. Such workers are issued references for post graduate training in the Academy.

The Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation, at the request of some foreign partners, provides assistance in training and qualification development of its national prosecution staff (in particular, from Vietnam, Cuba, South Ossetia)

2)  Organizational-analytical and methodological work

The organizational provision of the activity of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation on efficient management of the prosecution system, including planning of work and its analysis, elaborating and drafting administrative decisions, control over execution of organizational-regulatory documents is imposed on its General Organizational and Analytical Department.

The main functions of this Department of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation also include:

- providing full and reliable information to the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation about the current situation in the country, and implementing the instructions made in connection with emergency situations and serious crimes;

- organisational support for the activities of the law enforcement bodies  of the Russian Federation in combating crime;

- elaboration of uniform policy to ensure a single state statistical record of the applications and crime reports, the state of  criminality, number of detected criminal cases, the state  and results of the investigative work and prosecutorial supervision, and establishing the uniform procedure for drafting and providing account reports in the prosecution bodies;

- management of compiling and keeping statistical databases, which are considered the state information resources and reflect the state of criminality and results of crime combating.

In order to fulfil the above tasks and functions organizational and analytical units have been established in some large divisions of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation (for example, in the General Department for Criminal Court Proceedings, on the General Department of International Legal Cooperation).

Organizational and analytical units are established in prosecutor’s offices of all 83 constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

The departments of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation and prosecutor’s offices of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation and specialized prosecutor’s offices of an equivalent status carry out active methodological work by sending to the subordinate prosecutor’s offices methodological instructions and information letters, including on positive and negative experience of prosecutorial activities.

3)  The system of material and moral incentives and rewards

Article 44 of the Federal Law “On the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation” (Financial Provision and Social Security of Prosecution Staff) provides that the pay of prosecution staff shall consist of: the salary of office; bonus for grade rank, for length of service, for special conditions of service (in an amount of 175 per cent of the salary of office), for hardships and stressfulness of service, and for high achievements in service (in an amount of up to 50 per cent of the salary of office); percentage additions to salary for doctoral degree and academic rank in the specialty corresponding to official duties, for the honorary title “Meritorious Lawyer of the Russian Federation”; quarterly and annual bonuses for service performance; other payments provided for in legislative and other normative legal acts of the Russian Federation.

Percentage additions to salary for doctoral degree and academic rank shall be paid to candidates of science (Ph.D.) or docents in the amount of 5 per cent of the salary of office, and to doctors of science (Dr.Sci.) or professors — in the amount of 10 per cent of the salary of office.

Under Article 41.6 (Incentives for the staff members) of the Federal Law “On the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”, for exemplary discharge by the staff of their official duties, lengthy and impeccable service in prosecution bodies and institutions, carrying out of tasks of special significance and complexity, the following incentives shall be used:

commendation;

award of a Certificate of Honour;

placing on the Board of Honour or in the Book of Honour;

award of a monetary bonus;

award of a gift or a valuable gift;

award of a personal engraved weapon: cold weapon (dirk) or fire weapon (pistol);

early conferral of grade rank or promotion to the grade rank that is one rank higher than the next one;

award of the badge “For impeccable service in the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”;

award of the badge “Honorary Officer of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation” together with the handing over of the Certificate of Honour of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

          There are other kinds of incentives established by the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, such as the badges “Honorary Officer of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation” and “For Impeccable Service in the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”, some agency medals. In particular, in 2015, in connection with the 70th Anniversary of the establishment of the International Military Tribunal for the trial of major German war criminals in Nuremberg the Prosecutor General instituted the Medal of Rudenko[4].

The officers who have particularly excelled may be nominated for the award of the honorary title “Meritorious Lawyer of the Russian Federation” and state awards of the Russian Federation (medals and orders).

In accordance with the Order of the President of the Russian Federation No.1099 of 07.09.2010 (as amended on 30.12.2015) “On the Measures for Improvement of the State Awards System of the Russian Federation” the state award system of the Russian Federation includes, among other, the honorary title “Honorary Officer of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”. This honorary title is awarded to the highly professional members of the Prosecution Service for their personal contribution to strengthening law and order in the Russian Federation, protection of the rights and freedom of man and citizen, fight against crime and corruption, promotion of legal foundations of the Russian society and law-making activity, training of qualified staff for the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation.

The honorary title “Honorary Officer of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation” is assigned, as a rule, not earlier than 20 years since the date of beginning of the service in the prosecution bodies of the Russian Federation and provided the nominee for the title has interagency awards of the Federal state authority, prosecutor’s offices of the Russian Federation or federal state bodies of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

4)    Disciplinary responsibility

Any newly appointed prosecutor shall take the Oath of Office of the Prosecutor.

 By Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No.114 of 17.03.2010 “On Approval and Introduction of the Code of Ethics of the Prosecutor of the Russian Federation and the Concept of Educational Work in the Prosecution System of the Russian Federation” a Code of Ethics was endorsed for the prosecutor of the Russian Federation.

Section 5 of the Code deals with responsibility of the prosecutor for violation of the Code provisions. In particular, the following punitive measures may be applied by the head of the prosecutor’s office personally or, where appropriate, in the presence of staff members: verbal reprimand, warning on inadmissibility of unethical behavior, demand to make a public apology.

The violation by the prosecutor of the Code norms which manifested itself by the misbehaviour which disgraces the honour of the member of the Prosecution Service shall be a ground for bringing him/her| to disciplinary liability.

In accordance with Article 41.7 of the Federal Law for failure to discharge or improper discharge of their official duties and misconduct discrediting the honour of a prosecution officer, the heads of prosecution bodies and institutions shall have the right to impose the following disciplinary penalties on them:

admonition;

reprimand;

severe reprimand;

demotion in grade rank;

deprivation of the badge “For Impeccable Service in the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”;

deprivation of the badge “Honorary Officer of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”;

warning of the deficiency of fitness for the official position taken;

dismissal from the prosecution bodies.

          The above penalties are also imposed for failure by an officer to comply with restrictions and prohibitions, requests for prevention or resolution of conflict of interests, and failure to discharge duties imposed with a view to countering corruption.  In addition, under Article 41.9 of the Federal Law an officer shall be subject to dismissal from office pursuant to the procedure laid down in the laws of the Russian Federation regulating issues of service in prosecution bodies, due to loss of confidence in the following cases:

-         failure by the officer to take measures to prevent and/or resolve a conflict of interests whereto he was a party;

-         failure by the officer to submit information on his income, expenses, property and property liabilities, as well as on the income, assets, expenses, property and property liabilities of his spouse and minor children, or submitting knowingly unreliable or incomplete information;

-         participation of the officer, on a paid basis, in the activities of a management body of a commercial organisation, with the exception of cases provided for in a federal law;

-         conduct of business activities by the officer;

-         the officer being a member of a management body, board of trustees or supervisors, or another body of a foreign non-commercial non-governmental organisation or its organisational unit operating in the territory of the Russian Federation, if not provided for otherwise in an international treaty of the Russian Federation or the laws of the Russian Federation;

-         violation by the prosecutor, his/her spouse and  minor children in the cases provided for by the Federal Law “On Prohibition for Certain Categories of Persons to Open and Have Accounts (Deposits), Keep Cash Money and Valuables in Foreign Banks Situated Outside the Russian Federation, Own and (or) Use Foreign Financial Instruments”  of the prohibition to open and have accounts (deposits), keep cash money and valuables in foreign banks situated outside the territory of the Russian Federation, own and (or) use foreign financial instruments.

It is provided that the head of prosecution body or institution to whom it has become known that an officer subordinate to him gained a personal interest which leads or can lead to a conflict of interests, shall also be subject to dismissal due to loss of confidence in the event of failure to take measures to prevent and/or resolve a conflict of interests whereto the officer subordinate to him is a party, pursuant to the procedure laid down in the laws of the Russian Federation regulating issues of service in prosecution bodies.

The key criteria for ensuring the high quality and efficiency of the work of the prosecutors are:

-         professional competence of prosecutors;

-         their personal moral and business qualities;

-         impartiality and independence  of prosecutors in carrying out their professional activity;

-         creation of necessary material conditions for the life and activities of prosecutors.

In accordance with Article  40.4 of the Federal Law “On the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation”, the person newly appointed to the position of a prosecutor shall take the following Oath of the Prosecutor:

 “I dedicate myself to serving the Law, and I do solemnly swear:

 to scrupulously abide by the Constitution of the Russian Federation, the laws and international obligations of the Russian Federation, not allowing even a slightest deviation from them;

to fight without compromise against any violations of the law, whoever has committed them, to seek achieving high efficiency of prosecutorial supervision;

to actively protect the interests of an individual, society and the state;

to mindfully and carefully consider any proposals, applications and complaints of citizens, to be fair and impartial in deciding people’s fates;

to strictly keep state secrets and other secrets protected by the law;

to constantly improve my professional skills, value my professional honour, be a model of integrity,  moral purity, and decency, scrupulously preserve and enrich the best traditions of the Prosecution Service.

I am aware that any violation of this Oath will be inconsistent with my further service in prosecution bodies”.

By Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No.114 of 17.03.2010 (as amended on 22.04.2011) “On Approval and Introduction of the Code of Ethics of the Prosecutor of the Russian Federation and the Concept of Educational Work in the Prosecution System of the Russian Federation” a Code of Ethics was endorsed for the prosecutor of the Russian Federation.

Its preamble states that successful implementation of the tasks faced by the bodies and institutions of the Prosecution Service of the Russian Federation, such as ensuring the rule of law, unity and strengthening the legal order, protection of human rights and freedoms and law-protected interests of society and the state may be pursued only on the basis of high professionalism, honesty and integrity of prosecutors, their independence and fairness, the ability to counter any attempts of exerting improper influence on the results of official activities.

By the Orders of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation qualification requirements have been established for the offices of the prosecutor of the city, district and the prosecutor of an equivalent status (Order No.316 of 12.08.2010), deputy prosecutor of the city, district and the prosecutor of an equivalent status (Order No.5 of 09.01.2013), assistant prosecutor of the city, district and the prosecutor of an equivalent status (Order No.378 of 02.11.2011), and qualification requirements for special professional training of the graduates of the Academy for working in the Prosecution Service (Order No.519 of 28.11.2013).

When candidates are selected for the Prosecution Service and prosecutors appointed to higher positions assessment is performed of their knowledge, skills and expertise in accordance with the above mentioned qualification requirements.


2. Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Crucial criteria to ensure high quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors are as follows:

– professional competence of prosecutors;

– their personal moral qualities and professional aptitude;

– impartiality and independence of prosecutors in the exercise of professional activity;

– creation of necessary material conditions for the life and work of prosecutors.

In accordance with the requirements of Article 404 of the Federal Law "On the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation", the person for the first time appointed to the position of the Prosecutor shall take the following Oath of the Prosecutor:

"Devoting myself to the service of the Law, I solemnly promise:

to sacredly observe the Constitution of the Russian Federation, laws and international obligations of the Russian Federation, avoiding the slightest deviation from them;

to irreconcilably fight with any violations of the law, whoever committed, achieve high efficiency of prosecutorial supervision;

to actively protect the interests of individuals, society and the state;

to sensitively and attentively treat the suggestions, applications and complaints of the citizens,

to continuously maintain objectivity and fairness in the decision of people’s fates;

to strictly keep state and other secrets protected by law;

to constantly improve my skills, cherish my professional honor, to be a model of integrity, moral purity, modesty, to cherish and enrich the best traditions of Public Prosecutor’s Office.

I am aware that violation of the Oath is incompatible with the further stay in the bodies of Public Prosecutor’s Office".

By the Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 114 dated 17.03.2010 (as amended on 22.04.2011) "On approval and enactment of the Code of Ethics of a prosecutor of the Russian Federation and the Concept of Educational Work in the system of Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation", the Government approved the Code of Ethics of a prosecutor of the Russian Federation. In its preamble, it is indicated that the successful implementation of tasks faced by the bodies and organizations of Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation with regard to ensuring the rule of law, unity and strengthening of legality, protection of the rights and freedoms of man and citizen, as well as legally protected interests of society and the state, can be exercised only on the basis of high professional competence, honesty and integrity of prosecutors, their independence and impartiality, the ability to resist any attempts to improperly influence the performance of their official activities.

The orders of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation approved qualifying characteristics of positions (qualification requirements for positions) of city prosecutor, district prosecutor and equivalent prosecutor (order No. 316 dated 12.08.2010), city deputy prosecutor, district deputy prosecutor, equivalent prosecutor (order No. 5 dated 09.01.2013), city prosecutor assistant, district prosecutor assistant and equivalent prosecutor (order No. 378 dated 02.11.2011), as well as qualification requirements to special training of graduates of the Academy of the Prosecutor General’ Office of the Russian Federation to serve in the bodies of Public Prosecutor’s Office (order No. 519 dated 28.11.2013).

When carrying out selection of candidates for service in the bodies of Public Prosecutor’s Office and performing the appointment of prosecutors to higher positions, their knowledge, skills and abilities are in conformity with the specified qualification requirements.

3. Are there any indicators, formal or informal, which are used in your country to assess the quality and effectiveness of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered, etc.? Please briefly describe.

Performance indicators of the work of a prosecutor are divided as follows:

- quantitative indicators (e.g. the number of criminal cases launched, the number of persons prosecuted, the number of prosecutorial inspections held, including jointly or simultaneously with other bodies, the total number of violations of laws established, the amount of acts of prosecutorial response introduced);

- qualitative indicators (completeness of establishment of violations of the laws and circumstances contributing to them, the actual elimination of violations of the laws and circumstances contributing to them, the actual restoration of violated rights, freedoms and legitimate interests, the actual compensation of the harm caused by offenders, etc.);

- performance indicators (the number of offences committed, including crimes committed for a certain period of time – quarter, six months, year, total harmful consequences of the offences committed, and others). Performance indicators give a possibility to track the changes in the state of law, i.e., to establish the number of offences compared with the previous period.

There are also informal indicators:

– evaluation by the population of the activities of prosecutors through opinion polls, media analysis, consideration of complaints and statements;

– evaluation of the work of prosecutors by state bodies and public organizations.

By the order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 417/11R dated 30.11.2011, a working group to improve information and analytical work and the formulation of evaluation criteria and the effectiveness of the prosecution authorities has been established.

Within the framework of the activities carried out by this group, the Office for Legal Statistics of the Main Organizational and Analytical Department in conjunction with the Academy of Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation have developed criteria for evaluating the effectiveness of the bodies of Public Prosecutor’s Office in the main areas of activity.

The concerned departments of the Central Office of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation have conducted testing of one of the components of this evaluation by interviewing prosecutors, supervising the activities of the public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent transport public prosecutor’s offices.

According to the project, model to assess efficiency of activity of the bodies of Public Prosecutor’s Office consists of two components:

Intra-systemic evaluation of the effectiveness of the work of Public Prosecutor’s Office of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation on the basis of statistical indicators (objective evaluation);

evaluation of the effectiveness of the work of the bodies of Public Prosecutor’s Office conducted by expert community by means of interviewing prosecutors, supervising the activities of the public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent specialized public prosecutor’s offices (subjective evaluation).

The list of objective indicators in evaluating the work of a prosecutor is formed on the basis of quantitative data of existing forms of state and departmental statistical reporting.

In addition, the list of subjective indicators has been formed based on the evaluation of the work of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation on the directions of activities performed by the relevant departments of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation.

The final place of Public Prosecutor’s Office is determined by calculating the total quantitative values of the objective indicators with regard to the volume of the work performed by prosecutors, taking into account the work load of prosecutors in the areas of supervision, its performance and quality in relation to staff numbers, as well as points of subjective evaluation of the work of prosecutors in the areas of supervision allotted by the structural subdivisions of the Central Office of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation.

A pilot survey of structural divisions of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation has been organized based on questionnaires and tables with criteria and indicators prepared together with the Academy of Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation.

According to the results of generalization of tables received, the Office for Legal Statistics of the Main Organizational and Analytical Department has formed a compendium of materials "Criteria and indicators to evaluate activity of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation" for 2013 – 2014 and 1st half of 2015.

Analysis of the results of comparative studies has shown that most of the results of evaluation of activities of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation are confirmed by the decisions of the heads of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation and the information certificates on the visits to the regions to carry out inspections of the work of prosecutors.

It should also be noted that partly such approach to effectiveness evaluation, especially with regard to intra-systemic evaluation, is actually put into practice in accordance with the decree of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 58 dated 07.02.2013 "On approval of the Regulations on the application of common approaches in the preparation and examination of the activity of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent public prosecutor’s offices". It defines the List of key issues to be studied and evaluated when conducting a comprehensive and sector-specific inspection with regard to the organization of activities of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent specialized public prosecutor’s offices.

4. Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

The procedure of prosecutorial attestation is conducted to determine the compliance of a prosecutor with the official position held and the strengthening of service discipline.

The order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 242 dated 20.06.2012  (as amended on 22.04.2015) "On approval of the Regulations on the procedure for conducting attestation of prosecutors bodies and institutions of public prosecutor’s office of the Russian Federation" stipulates that attestation of public prosecutors is carried out in order to determine the compliance of a prosecutor with the official position held and is intended to promote improvement of activity of prosecutorial bodies and organizations with regard to recruitment, placement and training of employees, to determine the level of training of employees, to increase responsibility of employees for their work performance and strengthening of labor discipline, to create a personnel reserve for promotion to higher positions, to address issues on the award of the initial class ranks to employees, as well as to elaborate proposals for consideration at the session of the Commission of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation on the preliminary consideration of candidates for the positions of public prosecutors of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, equivalent prosecutors, and the extension of their powers.

The procedure of prosecutorial attestation shall be conducted at least once every five years. In some cases, it is possible to carry out extraordinary prosecutorial attestation.

The composition of the Attestation Commission consists of the Chairman of the Attestation Commission, Vice-Chairman of the Attestation Commission and members of the Attestation Commission, which are the heads of structural subdivisions of the bodies and institutions of Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation or their deputies, as well as the Secretary of the Attestation Commission. The composition of the Attestation Commission may include a representative of the Trade Union organization (if there is any elective body of primary Trade Union organization), members of veterans’ organizations, as well as bodies and institutions of Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation.

Attestation Commission performs evaluation of the professional qualities of an employee (diligence, discipline, initiative), examines specific indicators of professional activity of an employee, including taking into account the quality of performance of his duties, compliance with the statutory prohibitions and restrictions related to the service in the bodies and institutions of Public Prosecutor’s Office, fulfilling the requirements to service behavior, etc.

If necessary, an employee is given recommendations for elimination of deficiencies in the work and improvement of the efficiency of service activity.

According to the results of the attestation, the Attestation Commission shall take one of the following decisions:

- on the compliance with the position held;

- on incomplete official compliance with the position held;

- on incompliance with the position held.

In connection with the existing significant deficiencies in performance of the official activity by an employee and absence of grounds to adopt one of the above decisions, the Attestation Commission shall be entitled to suspend attestation of an employee for a period not exceeding six months, to give recommendations on elimination of shortcomings, to instruct an appropriate supervisor (usually, a direct supervisor) to monitor the implementation of the recommendations given by the Attestation Commission, to hear a supervisor and his employee after the established deadline at its session with consideration of the issues related to the measures taken to eliminate deficiencies, as well as to make an appropriate decision following the results of the hearing.

In case of disagreement of an employee with the decision made by the Attestation Commission, prior to approval of the decision, he can appeal it to the head of authority or organization of Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation, and after approval – to senior prosecutor or to the court. Filing of a complaint shall suspend the implementation of the conclusions made by the Attestation Commission.

Inspection of the work of prosecutors shall be carried out in accordance with the administrative documents of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation.

Thus, the Regulation of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation (approved by the Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 230 dated June 3, 2013) stipulates that official business visits are carried out for the purpose of conducting inspections of the execution of laws, activities of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent specialized public prosecutor’s offices, provision of assistance in the organization of work, study of positive experience, examination of the circumstances of emergencies, on-site addressing the applications concerning violations of the law, participation in the meetings, court hearings, etc.

Visits to public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent specialized public prosecutor’s offices are carried out in accordance with the Action Plan of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation. An issue of performing visits to conduct integrated and sector-specific inspection of the organization of the work conducted by subordinate prosecutors or for the provision of practical assistance not stipulated by the Action Plan of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation is addressed by the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation or his Deputy on the basis of a reasoned report submitted by head of unit, which is agreed with the supervising Deputy Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

For the purpose to organize the above visits, it is required to publish the order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation, Deputies Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation responsible for sending or supervising the activities of departments of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation in the federal districts. Such order establishes the dates of visits, composition of the commission and its head.

In consultation with the heads of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation, inspections can be attended by the employees of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, mostly from the reserve for nomination, as well as employees of the Academy of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation. In exceptional cases, composition of the commission can include heads of city public prosecutor’s offices, district public prosecutor’s offices, as well as other equivalent territorial and specialized public prosecutor’s offices.

The Regulation on the application of common approaches in the preparation and examination of the activity of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent specialized public prosecutor’s offices, which is approved by the Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 58 dated 07.02.2013  (hereinafter referred to as "the Regulation"), reflects the basic approaches to evaluate performance of the activities of inferior prosecutors by superior prosecutors, frequency and evaluation procedure, as well as composition of the commission.

The Regulation defines the common approaches in the preparation and examination of the activity of public prosecutor’s offices of constituent entities of the Russian Federation and equivalent specialized public prosecutor’s offices (hereinafter referred to as "public prosecutor’s office"), as well as establishes the list of key issues to be studied and evaluated when conducting a comprehensive inspection of the organization of prosecutorial activities.

The Regulation governs the issues of conducting comprehensive and sector-specific inspections of the activity of public prosecutor’s office.

Comprehensive inspection involves conducting inspection activities for the main areas of prosecutorial activity, except for financial and economic issues, which are checked separately.

Sector-specific inspection involves conducting inspection activities for one or more areas of prosecutorial activity, as well as certain sectors of oversight activities.

Comprehensive inspection aims at the study of the organization of work, ensuring comprehensive approach to oversight activities, meeting the requirements of the Federal Law "On the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation" and organizational and administrative documents of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation. In this case, when conducting comprehensive inspection, specialists analyze the impact of prosecutorial staff on inferior public prosecutor’s offices, adoption of response measures that are really affecting the state of law, including in connection with the consideration of appeals of individuals and legal entities, as well as study the role of the heads of public prosecutor’s offices in organizing activities on the main areas.

The purpose of sector-specific inspection is determined with regard to specific activity.

To identify possible shortcomings, specialists study available documents, inspection the materials and criminal cases, including on a selective basis.

Comprehensive inspection is mandatory conducted in accordance with the list of major issues to be studied and evaluated (Appendix to the Regulation), which form the basis for the establishment of a comprehensive inspection plan, as well as in accordance with the approved guidelines. The list includes issues of evaluation of the current state of work on the implementation of measures to prevent corruption, ensure of compliance of prosecutors and federal state civil servants with the restrictions and prohibitions, requirements on prevention or settlement of conflict of interests. The activities of the Attestation Commission aim at observance of the requirements to office behavior of prosecutors and settlement of conflict of interests, as well as at observance of the requirements to office behavior of federal state civil servants and settlement of conflict of interests.

When conducting a comprehensive inspection, based on major and minor issues, prosecutorial work is recognized as excellent, good, satisfactory or unsatisfactory in each area of prosecutorial activity and in general.

These evaluations are made for each major and supplementary issue and serve as the basis for the definition of sector-specific evaluation by areas of activity reflected as conclusion in appropriate references.

Based on sector-specific evaluations, specialists conduct general evaluation of prosecutorial activity, which is specified in the final certificate on the results of comprehensive inspection.

Prosecutorial work is evaluated in a similar way when conducting sector-specific inspection.

The final decision on the inspection results is made by the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation.

Scheduled comprehensive inspection of public prosecutor’s office of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation shall be generally appointed before the end of a 5-year term of office of public prosecutor of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation or not later than 10 years from the date of the last comprehensive inspection. The necessity to conduct sector-specific inspections of prosecutorial activity is determined in the formation of the Action Plan of the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation for the corresponding period.

Performance evaluation conducted during the inspection is an important component of internal organization of work of the bodies of public prosecutor’s office. Inspection results are taken into account during the organization and implementation of prosecutorial work in the future.

It should also be noted the specifics of activity of the prosecutors involved in consideration of criminal cases by the courts. The main criterion of work of public prosecutors is legitimate and good judgments, as well as other judicial decisions.

In order to give a relatively objective estimate of the work of a public prosecutor, it is required to conduct a full analysis of each criminal case considered with his participation.

Certain criteria to evaluate professional skills of public prosecutors are formulated in the Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 551 dated 24.12.2013  (as amended on 29.10.2014) "On approval of the Regulation on holding all-Russian competition "Best public prosecutor".

Among other things, specialists also take into account the criminal cases considered with the participation of public prosecutor, including their number, complexity, categories of crime, trial procedure, composition of the court (for example, consideration of cases with the participation of jurors), as well as the quality of pre-trial preparation of a public prosecutor (knowledge of the case, interaction with the authorities conducting the preliminary investigation and with the prosecutors supervising the investigation and inquiry, determination of the tactics of presenting evidence), and the effectiveness of the measures of prosecutorial response to unlawful and ungrounded judicial decisions (quality of submissions, reasons for cancellation and change of sentences rendered with the participation of a public prosecutor on the complaints of trial participants).

The level of executive discipline, adherence to prosecutorial ethics, commitment to professional development, etc. also play an important role in the evaluation of the activities of a public prosecutor.

In addition, it is necessary to underline that one of the most important evaluation elements is the level of public confidence to public prosecutor’s office, which is periodically determined, inter alia, by conducting various citizen surveys.

5. As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

- facilitate their work?

- evaluate their work?

The Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 1535 dated 11.12.2010  (as amended on 26.06.2013) "On additional measures on ensuring law enforcement" has been issued In order to improve the activities of law enforcement. According to this decree, coordination meetings on ensuring law enforcement shall be held in constituent entities of the Russian Federation.

In accordance with Article 8 of the Federal Law No. 2202-1 dated 17.01.1992 (as amended on 28.11.2015) "On the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation", it is the prosecutors who are charged with the coordination of activities on fight against crime conducted by the internal affairs bodies, bodies of the federal security service, bodies for control over circulation of narcotic and psychotropic substances, customs authorities and other law enforcement agencies. At the federal level, sessions of the Coordination Meeting are convened by the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation and held under his chairmanship.

It should be noted that such coordination meetings do not substitute coordination meetings of heads of law enforcement agencies, anti-drug and anti-terrorist commissions, as well as do not interfere with the investigative and criminal procedural activity of bodies of inquiry and investigators.

Typically, the issues submitted for discussion are complex in their nature. Their addressing involves participation of the concerned territorial bodies of the federal public authorities, public prosecutor’s offices, bodies of state power of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, local self-government bodies. Joint implementation of the final documents adopted at the meetings by law enforcement authorities and public authorities of constituent entities of the Russian Federation contributes to the strengthening of the rule of law and improvement of the crime situation.

The Order of the Prosecutor General of the Russian Federation No. 7 dated 16.01.2012 "On the organization of work of public prosecutor’s offices of the Russian Federation on combating crime" has been issued to increase efficiency of such activity of public prosecutor’s offices of the Russian Federation. In particular, it provides for the implementation of the joint work of law enforcement bodies in combating corruption, extremism and terrorism, crimes in the economic sphere, as well as combating the crimes connected with illicit trafficking of drugs, weapons, other prohibited items and substances.

Independent and smooth prosecutorial activity is ensured by Article 447 of the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation of the Russian Federation, which included a public prosecutor in the category of persons subject to special procedure of criminal proceedings. In addition, paragraph 1 of Article 42 of the Federal Law "On the Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Russian Federation", regulating the procedure for bringing prosecutors to administrative responsibility, sets one more guarantee for the independence of prosecutors – it places inspection of reporting the fact of offence committed by a public prosecutor under exclusive jurisdiction of public prosecutor’s offices.

In addition, by the Federal Law No 45-FZ dated 20.04.1995 "On the state protection of judges, officials of law enforcement agencies and controlling bodies", a public prosecutor is referred to the number of persons subject to state protection. This allows the prosecutors to perform their professional duties despite the threats to life and health.

6. Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

In recent years, a number of federal laws have been adopted with the aim of improving the efficiency of fight against terrorism. The following federal laws are of great importance.

The Federal Law No. 245-FZ dated 03.11.2009 made amendments to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation in its Articles 35 and 210, as well as in the Code of Criminal Procedure of the Russian Federation in its Article 100. Such amendments provide, inter alia, for clearer delineation of the signs of an organized group and criminal community and differentiation of responsibility of members of organized criminal groups, as well as increased responsibility of persons occupying higher positions in criminal hierarchy, including in the form of life imprisonment.

The Federal Law No. 134-FZ dated 28.06.2013 "On amending certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation on countering illegal financial transactions" amended 22 federal laws for the purpose of creating conditions to prevent, detect and deter money laundering, terrorist financing, illegal financial transactions, receipt of the proceeds of corruption. In particular, the Federal Law No. 115-FZ dated 07.08.2001 "On countering the legalization (laundering) of income obtained by criminal means and financing of terrorism" has been amended (including taking into account recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering) for the purpose of combating illegal financial operations, extending the list of organizations obligated to participate in implementation of the requirements of the specified Federal Law. In addition, the list of financial transactions subject to mandatory control is updated.

By the Federal Law No. 302-FZ dated 02.11.2013 "On amending certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation", the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation is supplemented by Articles 2053, 2054, 2055 on the responsibility for training in order to carry out terrorist activities, organization of terrorist community and participation in such community, organization of the activities of a terrorist organization and participation in such organization. In addition, it provides a mechanism for exemption in favor of the state of the property owned by close relatives of the perpetrator of a terrorist act, the legality of purchase of which they cannot substantiate.

The Federal Law No. 130-FZ dated 05.05.2014 "On amending certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation" is aimed at enhancing the protection of citizens and society from terrorism (disposition of Article 205 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation has been changed – destabilization of activity of bodies of state power and local self-government is attributed to a terrorist act; responsibility for training in order to carry out terrorist activities, organization of a terrorist community or participation in such community, organization of illegal armed formation or participation in such formation has been strengthened).

The new National Security Strategy of the Russian Federation approved by Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 683 dated 31.12.2015 aims at increasing the efficiency of combating organized crime and terrorism, including through the consolidation of efforts of the federal bodies of state power, other state bodies, bodies of state power of constituent entities of the Russian Federation, bodies of local self-government, civil society institutions.

The Decree of the President of the Russian Federation No. 664 dated 26.12.2015 "On measures to improve state management in the field of combating terrorism" has been issued in order to improve state management in the field of combating terrorism. In particular, this regulatory legal act approved the Regulation on the National Anti-Terrorist Committee.

Expansion of Russia’s participation in international anti-crime cooperation, including through the conclusion of relevant international treaties, also plays an important role. For example, the Federal Law No. 26-FZ dated 26.04.2004 ratified the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its supplementing Protocol against the Smuggling of Migrants by Land, Sea and Air, and the Protocol to Prevent, Suppress and Punish Trafficking in Persons, Especially Women and Children.

As far as issues of extradition and legal assistance in criminal matters are concerned, the Russian Federation has contractual relations with almost 80 countries of the world.

7. Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

The number of international organizations operating in the sphere of combating organized crime and terrorism currently seems quite sufficient.

Meanwhile, a serious obstacle in the criminal prosecution of persons involved in the activities of terrorist organizations, including Islamic State (ISIS), is presented by a policy of double standards in the fight against international terrorism. It is necessary to form a united anti-terrorist front to fight against international terrorism.

The task of developing universal conventions on extradition and legal assistance in criminal matters in the framework of the United Nations, including matters of tracing, seizure, confiscation and return of assets derived from criminal activity, is also of great relevance.

8. What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

There are several major challenges and threats that have the most significant impact on the work of prosecutors, including in the sphere of combating organized crime and terrorism.

First of all, they are presented by continuing activities of extremist and terrorist groups in the North Caucasus, as well as increased activities of international terrorist organizations recognized as such on the basis of the claims filed by the Prosecutor General’s Office of the Russian Federation.

The problem of using information and telecommunication networks by terrorists to their advantage also requires appropriate addressing.

Thus, the activities of international terrorist organizations ("Islamic State", "Hizb ut-Tahrir al-Islami", etc.) on the recruitment and training of new supporters and raising awareness of extremist ideology are consistently moving to the Internet and the media. Such activities are associated with the popularization of religious radicalism (mostly Islamic), glorification of the image of its supporters, idealization of violent extremism as a method to regulate social relations on the territories occupied by terrorists, promises material wealth to its followers.

Currently, the Russian Federation still faces a threat from the activities of transnational organized criminal groups supporting the operation of criminal markets, including markets on the illicit manufacturing and trafficking in narcotic drugs, psychotropic substances and precursors; trafficking in human beings and illegal migration; money laundering (legalization) of criminal incomes and their siphoning abroad; illicit manufacturing and trafficking in firearms, ammunition, explosives and explosive devices.

The growing danger is presented by the crime using high technology (cybercrime).

An important factor of social tension continues to be presented by illegal migration to the Russian Federation of foreign citizens, mainly from the countries of Central Asia.


Slovakia / Slovaquie

17.      Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

One of the fundamental rights of the Prosecutor is the right to ensure the conditions for enhance and upskilling of the qualification.

On the other hand, the basic obligation of Prosecutors is to deepen their professional Qualification.

The General Prosecutor, in the Plan of professional training and education for the Prosecution Service, annually approves training activities, which include drafts of the subordinated Prosecution Offices.

Training of Prosecutors is being realized through trainings, seminars, but also through the exchange of current acquaintance during working conferences.

Besides this form of education, Prosecutors have the possibility to join the education that is organized by the Judicial Academy of the Slovak Republic that prepares and annually approves the learning plan.

The education is organized in those forms:

1.)   Preparatory education (trainee Prosecutor of the Prosecution Office),

2.)   Life Learning Programme for the Judges and Prosecutors – the Prosecutor has the possibility to register electronically,

3.)   Language learning.

18.      Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Crucial is the position of the Prosecution Office by itself as the separate hierarchically arranged uniform set of the public authorities led by the General Prosecutor. The General Prosecutor has the position of the head of a central public authority.

The Prosecutor shall especially have the right to perform the prosecutor´s profession without any intimidation, pressure, hindrances, improper interference or illegal interference with his powers and personal responsibility.

The Prosecutor has also the right to request of Superior Prosecutor that should be disqualified from handling the matter if he deems the instruction to be contrary tolaw or to his legal opinion.

19.      Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The indicators of sort of agenda, manner and promptness of execution of the case by the Prosecutor but also the number of cases executed by the Prosecutor in a given period of time, are included in the statistics, which are filled in by the Prosecutor after execution of each case. Presented statistics are not used for reviewing of the quality and efficiency of work of the Prosecutor as an individual, but is used for interpretation of work of the Prosecution Service as the entity. Presented data are being reflected in the statement of activity of the Prosecution Service which is annually submitted to the National Council of the Slovak Republic by the General Prosecutor. The statement contains findings of legality status, including the statistic data of activities of individual Prosecution Offices, including the Special Prosecution Office.

Head Prosecutor of each organizational Section is responsible for the quality and effectiveness of the work of Prosecutors. Superior Prosecution Offices execute periodically an inspection of the work of subordinated Prosecution Offices focused to listed indicators. The inspections can be even focused thematically for execution of certain sort of work of the Prosecution Offices. In the case of discovering of the lack in the work of Prosecutors, the measures are adopted and consequently controlled for its elimination.

20.      Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Rating of the work of the Prosecutor takes place always in relation to the selection procedure and disciplinary proceedings, eventually on the request of the Prosecutor regarding expiration of function of the Prosecutor.

The Prosecutor is being rated by the Head of Office based on the materials prepared by the leading Prosecutor.

Rating of itself is mostly about:

-       evaluation of procedures and decision making activities of the Prosecutor, evaluation of the professional level of decision making and fluency of proceedings,

-       also evaluation of knowledge of generally binding law regulations, professional regulations, increase of professional qualification,

-       rating includes also evaluation of official discipline compliance

If the Prosecutor disagrees with the rating content, he or she may raise objections to the Head of Office. If the Head of Office does not comply for his or her objection, decision about the raised objections regarding the selection procedure and disciplinary proceedings will be taken by the Prosecutors´ Council and regarding the expiration of function of the Prosecutor, the Prosecutor may seek correction of the rating on the Court.

One of the attributes of rating of the Prosecutor is the continuity of the proceedings. In this context, there are periodically monitored unfinished things at all levels of the Prosecution Offices, and if necessary, the measures are taken to remove found deficiencies.

Any deficiencies in the work of the Prosecutors are rated, let us say analysed by the General Prosecutor on the periodical quarterly sessions of the General Prosecutor and Regional Prosecutors.

21.      As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

          In the context of the fight with the most serious forms of organized crime - called criminal gangs of organized groups of mafia type and also in the fight against terrorism, it was in the Slovak Republic created separated specialized prosecution authority – the Special Prosecution Office as well as the Special Criminal Court of the Slovak Republic.  Within their exclusive competences belong, inter alia, all criminal offences committed by the members of the organized groups as well as all criminal offences of terrorism and related criminal offences. 

          Prosecutors classified to perform work on the Special Prosecution Office have the personal supplementary charge reflected in their functional salary for the mentioned agenda. Additional specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators in order to facilitate the work of the Prosecutor, who executes this kind of agenda, do not exist.

22.       Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Recently the Slovak Republic has adopted a number of the legislative changes that are directly related mainly with the fight against terrorism. In this context, it could be mentioned, the amendment to the Criminal Code, effective of 1 January 2016 (Act Nr. 444/2015 the Journal of Laws, amending the Act Nr. 300/2005 the Journal of Laws, of the Criminal Code and of amending and repealing further legislative measures). With presented Act, the multiple changes were adopted, which summarily substantially influenced the activity in the fight against terrorism. As an example it can be mentioned the provision on the protection of witness – of the criminal offence of terrorism, change of the reasons for the custody for the persons accused of criminal offences of terrorism, etc. With regards to the fact, that mentioned legislative changes entered into force only in January 2016, it is not possible to evaluate their practical relevance, but can be legitimately assumed, that will have considerable effect.

23.       Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

We consider, that current international conventions as well as the organizations provide adequate legal basis for the effective fight against organized crime and terrorism. On the other side, as well as the individual forms of organized crime (terrorism) are changing and shaping from time to time, for the international legislation and organizations, which are dedicated the fight against those forms of criminal activity, it is absolutely necessary to respond to those changes. Our opinion is that potential difficulties in practice are not related to the lack of international legislation, but are related to the lack of applied existing legal institutes in practice.

24.      What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

We consider the biggest challenge in prosecution of cases of organized crime and terrorism is the issue of a quality selection, education, financial remuneration of members of the Police, who are dedicated the investigation and are taking the evidence in this form of crime.


Slovenia / Slovénie

  1. Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

It is definitely done. Expert supervision over the work of  the  District  State  Prosecutor’s  Offices,  which  includes  the Specialised  State  Prosecutor’s Office, is carried out by the Office of  the  State  Prosecutor  General through  the  general,  partial  or individual  expert  review  of  their work. The  files may be inspected only  by supreme or  higher  state prosecutors.  The lawfulness  and  timeliness  of  work, the  viability  of  the  procedural powers  and  possibilities,  and  the regularity  of  expert  decisions  with respect  to  the  established prosecution  policy  and  issued general  instructions  are  reviewed and assessed within the framework of expert supervision. The detected deficiencies or errors are explained by addressing concrete examples, that are also presented during regular expert trainings for State Prosecutors. Otherwise, the quality of the work of prosecutors is also provided by issuing instructions, approved by college of the Criminal Affairs  Department at the Office of  the  State  Prosecutor  General.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

A state prosecutor shall be self-dependent and bound to the Constitution and statute in performing his state prosecutorial service.  Pursuant to the Constitution, a state prosecutor shall also be bound by the general principles of international law and ratified and published international treaties.  The crucial criteria for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors remains the fact that decisions made by the state prosecutor shall not be interfered with in concret cases, except by way of general instructions and the assigning of a case in the manner stipulated by the State Prosecutor's Office Act. A state prosecutor who believes that his self-dependence has been violated may request the State Prosecutorial Council to deal with the violation.  If the State Prosecutorial Council concludes that the request is justified, it may remedy the violation or request that it be remedied and make its conclusion public as appropriate.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors is assessed by the evaluation on the state prosecutorial service. The quality criteria for performance assessment of state prosecutors were adopted by the  State Prosecutorial  Council. The object of assessment are:

1. work capabilities and expert knowledge,

2. personal characteristics,

3. social skills,

4. leadership qualifications.

Also timely performance  of  prosecutor’s duties is considered. State prosecutor's duty is to perform all procedural acts without delay, as a rule in 90 days, along with the order of assigned case-load. With regards to the number of assigned matters (cases) there are considered all prosecutorial decisions and attendances on hearings which are compared to other State Prosecutors from the same department or Proseturor’s Office. When prosecutor resolves more demanding matters, his or her work in compared to prosecutors, resolving comparable matters.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

The State Prosecutorial Council prepares the evaluations on the state prosecutorial

service for state prosecutors once every three years because every three years the prosecutor has the right to promotion. Before that the evaluation can be prepared by order of the State Prosecutor General, head of district state prosecutor’s office or prosecutor himself or herself. In first three years of performing  state  prosecutorial  service the evaluation has to be prepared yearly.

 

By evaluating the state prosecutorial service for state prosecutor the State Prosecutorial Council assesses that state prosecutor:

1.      is unsuitable for the state prosecutorial service;

2.      does not fulfil the criteria for promotion;

3.      fulfils the criteria for promotion;

4.      fulfils the criteria for expeditious promotion;

5.      fulfils the criteria for exceptional promotion for appointment to the higher title of state prosecutor

No appeal shall be permitted against the evaluation on the state prosecutorial service, but the administrative dispute is allowed.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

There are no specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for fight against organised crime and terrorism for those cases which are in competences of the Districts State Prosecution Offices. However, in demanding major cases discontinued workload and appointment of trainee in order to offer assistance are intended.

State Prosecution Act provides real jurisdiction for dealing with those types of crime to the Specialized Prosecution Office. The criteria for assessment of the work of prosecutors in this institution are different as for the others.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

There were no recent legislative activities in field of organised crime and terrorism that would relate to state prosecutor's service. Our legislation has been assessed by different international organization. For the time being there is no need for new legal provision. Some possibilities are under consideration (criminal offences committed by foreign fighters).

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

We consider mentioned legislation and the work of these institutions as sufficient.

        

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

As regard on quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors the major challenge is introduction and the use of the new information system for register and possibility for analyzing the cases and the work of prosecutors in all phases of procedure.

For the fight against organized crime and terrorism the knowledge and information are of the great importance . We will try to organize and to participate the seminars and other forms of trainings for prosecutors and follow developments of these patterns of crime on domestic and international level.


Spain / Espagne

1.    Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

Yes. 

First of all in Spain there is a special care in the process of recruitment that assure the qualification of the candidates. The access to the judicial career is based on the principles of merit and capacity. In order to join the Public Prosecutor’s Office, duly qualified candidates must pass an open and public competition, which will be held together with the examinations for the Judiciary (namely in the same way that the access to the Judicial Career since there is only one selection procedure which is common for judges and prosecutors). Successful candidates opting for Prosecution must then pass a training course ( about 9 months) at the Centre for Legal Studies

This period of initial training is follow of a continuous training curriculum for prosecutors. Participation in continuous training activities is mandatory for Prosecutor specialized in different matters, for instance, organised crime, terrorism, corruption, environmental crime, drug trafficking, juvenile crimes, crimes against women, hates crimes, judicial cooperation etc.

The principle of specialitation as a main criteria of organization of the Prosecutor Services is very useful to maintain the quality of work . Specialized Prosecutors perform their duties under the coordination of a Prosecutor Chief of specials units and this coordination assure the unity of action, the adecuate and updated training and it helps prosecutors to face complex cases

Periodically, the inspection service pay a visit to the different Offices of Prosecutors and check the quality of work.

2.         Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

A complete initial and continuous training is essential but it is also important to provide prosecutors with material resources, like proper offices, computers, access to law and jurisprudence/case law databases, etc. The prosecutors should also have enough administrative support.

3.         Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

We don’t have indicators to asses the quality and efficiency of the prosecutor’s work.

4.         Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

In Spain we don’t have a special procedure for evaluation of the work of each prosecutor.

The inspection service could find complaints or misconduct problems in the work of some prosecutor during their inspection visits. If the problems are considering a disciplinary offence it is necessary to initiate a disciplinary proceeding.

5.         As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

-       facilitate their work? Yes. We have Specialised Offices in terrorism and organised crime matters with specialised prosecutors.

-      

         - Evaluate their work? No.

6.         Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

Spain amended the Criminal Code to adjust their provisions to the EU decisions and directives. Some changes have also been done in procedural criminal law in order to implement the Directives about procedural rights. The harmonization in substantive definitions and in procedural rights helps to create mutual confidence between European prosecutors and is useful to understand better the different judicial systems.

The last amendment of the Spanish Criminal Procedural Law has established new time limitations for the criminal investigations not only for the new criminla cases but also for the old one without providing judges and prosecutors with personal and material resources for fulfilling these new investigation deadlines. The general assessment of these modifications is pretty negative since new legal provisions cannot be enforced with no proper financial investment. It’s very difficult for prosecutor to examine old proceedings and try to complete them within the new time limits.

7.         Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Eurojust, Europol and Interpol help prosecutors in judicial cooperation and are capable to create methods to assure a better coordination in cases of parallel investigations but  the efficiency rather depends on the work of national prosecutors.

8.         What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Spanish Prosecutors demand more human and material resources but over all the Spanish Prosecution Service needs to have an independent and sufficient budget to assure an efficient performance of its duties. Nowadays the Prosecutor Service depends on the financial decisions of the Ministry of Justice about everything: the Ministry decides about the number of prosecutors, the number of civil servants in the prosecutor’s offices, the material resources, ITC matters, etc. Even the prosecutors training depends on the Ministry of Justice. It’s essential to entitle the Prosecution Service to desing, plan and put in place its training curricula for prosecutors to assure the quality of their work.


Turkey / Turquie

1- Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

The prosecution system in Turkey functions with the procedures that guarantees quality in the prosecutors’ work; and recently, also with the effect of the amendments in the laws, the prosecution system not only guarantees quality, but also obligates a quality prosecution service. That is to say, the quality in the work of the prosecutors were guaranteed by the removal of the obstacles before the impartiality and independence of the judiciary with the amendments in the legislation in the recent years, and in the meantime, the renewal of the existing service buildings and the enhancement of physical conditions as far as the conditions in hand allowed; and therefore, judicial service of high quality became an obligation.

In addition, pursuant to Articles 16 and 17 of the Law No. 5235 on the Establishment, Tasks and Powers of the First Instance and District Courts of Jurisdiction; in Turkey, the prosecution services at the cities and districts with a court institution are carried out by the Chief Public Prosecutor’s Offices of that city or district. There is one public prosecutor and a sufficient number of prosecutors at a Chief Public Prosecutor’s Office. In order for the quality to be guaranteed in the conduct of prosecutorial services, the efficiency of the carried out investigations must be improved. One of the objectives (Objective 3.11) stated in the Judicial Reform Strategy document prepared by the Ministry of Justice is the improvement of the efficiency of investigations. It is significant both for the implementers and for the beneficiaries of the judicial services that the investigation stages be identified for each type of crime and the information on the procedures to be followed be available beforehand. The works of the Department of Strategy Development of the Ministry of Justice are still in progress in line with this purpose.

2- Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

The most important criterion for the public prosecutors to be able to reach the highest level of quality and sufficiency is being independent and impartial while carrying out their duties. In Turkey, the main duty of the public prosecutors is the criminal proceedings. Criminal proceedings consist of two stages: investigation and prosecution. The authority of initiation of criminal investigation and reaching to a conclusion as a result of the investigation belongs to public prosecutors, who are independent and impartial in carrying out judicial proceedings. This is ensured by the Tenure of Judges and Prosecutors in Article 139 of the Constitution. On the other hand, the Ministry of Justice also provides financial resources to enable the procedures to be carried out in an efficient investigation. Thanks to this resource, which is called the “Fund for Trial Expenses”, the prosecutors carry out their work with ease. The prosecutors are also provided with a sufficient number of personnel to assist them in their work.

3- Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The advancement of degrees and promotions of the public prosecutors are conducted by the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors of Turkey within the framework of the principles drawn by the provisions of the Law No. 2802 on Judges and Prosecutors as well as the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors. During the promotion period of the public prosecutors, the number of investigation files that they are obliged to finalize are taken into consideration in terms of their promotion.

4- Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

There are official procedures followed in the evaluation of the work of the prosecutors. The chief public prosecutors of the assize courts prepare reports evaluating the work of the prosecutors within their jurisdiction for a two-year period. In case the prosecutors think that these reports by the chief public prosecutors do not reflect the truth, they have the right to initiate proceedings for the abolishment of the relevant reports before administrative courts.

The administrative inspections of the prosecutors are carried out by justice inspectors under the Ministry of Justice pursuant to Article 144 of the Constitution, and the judicatory inspections are carried out by the board inspectors under the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors pursuant to Article 159 of the Constitution every two years. With these inspections, the work of the prosecutors are evaluated, and at the end of these evaluations, inspectors prepare status reports as well as performance assessment and development forms.

The prosecutors have the right to object to the status reports prepared by the inspectors before the Inspection Board of the Ministry of Justice, and to the performance assessment and development forms before the Inspection Board of the High Council of Judges and Prosecutors. If their objection gets rejected, they may initiate proceedings before the administrative courts for the abolishment of the relevant procedures carried out by the inspectors.

5- As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

         - facilitate their work?

         - evaluate their work?

In the chief public prosecutor’s offices in Turkey, there is a division of labour among the public prosecutors in order for the chief public prosecutors to be able to conduct tasks in a rapid and efficient manner. It is possible to establish bureaus that are only in charge of the investigations into organised crime and anti-terrorism, and assign to these bureaus public prosecutors who are distinguished with their professional seniority and sufficiency. These public prosecutors are only assigned with the conduct of investigations on these matters and cannot be referred a general investigation file. Thanks to this method of assignment, the public prosecutors are enabled to carry out investigations more efficiently.

Moreover, in terms of organised crime and anti-terrorism, there are procedures that are benefited from with the purpose of facilitating the work of the prosecutors. To clarify, due to reasons such as the difficulty in gathering of evidence or the high number of suspects, certain measures such as audio surveillance or recording of communication envisaged in the Code of Criminal Procedure are applied for longer periods of time in these types of crime; and pursuant to the same Code, in case the said crimes are committed within the activities of a company, an assignment of a trustee is possible upon the request of a prosecutor in order for the work of the company to be continued; in order to fight these types of offences, the prosecutors may request from the court the assignment of a confidential investigator and/or the implementation of surveillance with technical means; and in order to get the fugitive suspect charged with these types of offences to appear at the hearing, the prosecutors may also request a decision of confiscation from the court regarding the suspect’s properties, rights and assets in Turkey in a way that is proportionate to the purpose.

 6-Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

 The Draft Law on Making Amendments to Certain Laws In Order To Reduce the Workload Regarding the Criminal Procedures, which was prepared since the classical protection measures do not suffice to fight against the funding of the channels of terrorism, which is a cross-border organized crime; and since some additional regulations on Article 4 of the Law no 6415 on the Prevention of the Funding of Terrorism have been considered necessary in order to more effectively fight against the funding of terrorism and to apply, during the investigation and prosecution of a relevant crime, certain prosecution techniques such as appointing trustees to the administration of companies, identifying, wiretapping and recording any communication between suspects, the assignment of a confidential investigators, and doing the monitoring work via technical tools, was presented to the relevant public organisation on July 10th, 2015.

The fundamental law on fight against terrorism in force in our country is the Anti-Terrorism Law no 3713, which was passed on April 12th, 1991. The aforementioned law regulates issues such as terror and terror criminals, actions that constitute a terror crime, and the execution of penalty sentences regarding terror crimes.

The amendments to the aforementioned law have been made with the following laws:

The Law no 3842 passed on November 18, 1992; the Law no 4082 passed on February 28, 1995; the Law no 4131 passed on November 13, 1995; the Law no 4178 passed on August 29, 1996; the Law no 4928 passed on July 15, 2003; the law no 5532 passed on June 29, 2006; the Law no 6008 passed on July 22, 2010; the law no 6352 passed on July 2, 2012; the Law no 6353 passed on July 4, 2012; the Law no 6415 passed on February 7, 2013; the Law no 6459 passed on April 11, 2013; the Law no 6495 passed on July 12, 2013; and the Law no 6526 passed on February 21, 2014.

Article 10 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, which regulated the procedures regarding the investigation and prosecution of the actions that constitute a crime in accordance with the law, and the courts that are in charge of hearing the cases launched in relation to the law, was abolished in accordance with Article 19, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph B of the Law no 6526 regarding the Amendment on the Anti-Terrorism Law, on criminal procedures, and on Some Laws, which was passed on February 21, 2014.

After the abolishment of Article 10 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, the pending cases and the duties of the courts formerly authorised in relation to the law were transferred to High Criminal Courts. In order to carry out this transfer, Article 12 of the law no 5235 on the Establishment, Jurisdiction and Competencies of the Judicial Justice Courts of First Instance and the Regional Courts of Judicial Justice was amended.

Upon the abolishment of Article 10 of the Anti-Terrorism Law with the Law no 6526, the duties of the public prosecutors in charge of investigating the terror crimes were terminated, and the general rules of procedures provided by the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures started to be implemented.

In accordance with the abrogated article 10 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, during the detention period, the suspect was able to receive the legal assistance of only one defendant. With the amendment in 2014, however, this exception was abolished, and the general rule provided by Article 149 of the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures has become valid.

Article 95 of the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures provides that when the suspect is arrested, detained or his/her detention period has been extended, the situation shall be communicated to a relative or a person that the suspect has chosen, as soon as possible, with the order of the public prosecutor. The abrogated article 10-3-d of the Anti-Terrorism Law, on the other hand, provided that only a relative of the suspect would be informed of the situation. However, the general rule was being implemented for the crimes regulated by Article 10-4 of the Anti-Terrorism Law, and both a relative, and another person the suspect chose were being informed about the situation. This exception as well has been abolished as of 2014.

Article 91 of the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures provides that the detention period may not exceed 24 hours, yet if the crime has been committed collectively, the detention period may be extended for three days by public prosecutor, for one day each time, due to the difficulty in collecting the evidence, or the number of suspects. The exception that the detention period which is regulated by the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures as 24 hours to be executed as 48 hours, provided by the abrogated article 10 of the Anti-Terrorism Law no 3713, also has been abolished the regulation on Article 91 of the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures has again become valid.

On the other hand, a regulation has been added to Article 91 of the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures with the article 13 of the Law no 6638 on the Amendment of the Law on the Police Powers, the Law on the Gendarmerie Organisation, Duties and Competencies, and Some Laws, passed on March 27, 2015. This regulation provides that the chief police officers determined by chief administration officers shall be able to order for a twenty-four-hour detention period and can order for a forty-eight-hour detention period on condition that the acts of violence that happen during social events become widespread enough to destroy the public order, within the context of crimes committed collectively, and within the context of crimes that contain force and violence committed during social events; crimes regulated by the Turkish Penal Code no 5237, which are intentional killing, reckless killing, intentional injury, sexual assault, the sexual abuse of children, theft, looting, drug or stimulant material trafficking, offending against measures taken against infectious diseases, prostitution and maltreatment; crimes regulated by the Anti-Terrorism Law no 3713; crimes defined on article 33, Paragraph 1, Subparagraph A of the Law no 2911 on Meetings and Demonstrations; the crime of offending against curfew, which is declared based on the Provincial Administration Law no 5442; and in the act catching of criminals committing the crimes defined on Article 3 of the Anti-Smuggling Law no 5607.

In accordance with the amendment made on Article 94 of the Law on Criminal Procedures with the Law no 6526, the person arrested during investigation or prosecution upon the warrant of arrest issued by the Judge or the Court has to be brought before the competent judge or court no later than 24 hours. If this is not possible, the contact of the suspect with the competent judge or court will be established via the audio and video communication system installed in the judicial premises located in, or near the place of arrest.

The statement “facts” on Article 100 of the Law no 5271 on the Criminal Procedures, the heading of which is “the reasons of arrest”, has been changed as “concrete evidence” with Article 8 of the Law no 6526.

7- Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like EuroJust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

Regarding organised crimes and fight against terrorism, our country has been a party to fundamental conventions of the United Nations and the European Council. We consider that the aforementioned conventions suffice to deal with organised crimes and fight against terrorism.

The judges that serve at the Ministry of Justice have been determined as contact points as for the follow-up of the judicial cooperation requests made before the EuroJust and the European Judicial Network that acts under the umbrella of the EuroJust, and enabling the necessary coordination regarding such requests. The judicial cooperation on responding to requests related to all the criminal issues including organised crimes and fight against terrorism can thus be strengthened, and necessary information can be shared with the contact points in relevant countries.

On the other hand, as already known, Interpol is a unit established in order to enable cooperation between the security forces of the member states on international organized crimes and terrorism; and Europol carries out the same function between the member states of the European Union.

The Ministry of Justice does not have a central authority in terms of the Interpol applications. Yet the operations related tracking and tracing of the wanted suspects fled abroad, identifying their location, and their extradition can be easily followed up and carried out via Interpol.

8- What are the major challenges in your country as regards the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors and, in particular, their fight against organised crime and terrorism?

The biggest problems encountered by public prosecutors in our country in terms of organised crimes and fight against terrorism are the facts that investigation files regarding such issues are too extensive, and that an effective cooperation with the countries that the files are related to may at times not be fully established.


Ukraine

1.     Does the prosecution service in your country work strategically with ensuring quality in the work of prosecutors? If yes, how is that done?

The public prosecution service of Ukraine undertakes its activity basing on the territorial principle and realises its present authority exceptionally within the framework and in a way prescribed by the Constitution of Ukraine and its legislation. The duty to administer the subordinate public prosecution service authorities and to control their work is imposed on the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine and regional public prosecution service authorities.

Aiming to ensure the systematic and proper work, the public prosecution authorities draft their work plans for a relevant period. In particular, the work plans of the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine and the regional prosecutors` offices are adopted for a half a year ahead and determine the most important and perspective activity which is subjected to making amendment on a quarterly basis. All the executors and the subordinate prosecutors` offices are informed of all the planned activity beforehand.

2.                      Which criteria are considered crucial in your country for securing the highest quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors: their independence, impartiality, human and material resources, conditions of work etc.? Please briefly describe.

Article 3 of the Law of Ukraine “On the Public Prosecution Service” sets up the principles on which the work of the public prosecution service of Ukraine is based. In particular, it is based on the following principles: the rule of law, the recognition of a person`s life and health, honour and dignity, inviolability and security as the highest social value, the principle of legality, fairness, impartiality and objectivity, the territorial principle, the presumption of innocence, independence of prosecutors, which provides the existence of guarantees for absence of a political, material and another impact on a prosecutor in making him a decision while performing his professional duty.

Furthermore, it is secured in the legislation that the function of the public prosecution service of Ukraine shall be exclusively performed by prosecutors. Delegation of functions of the public prosecution service, as well as appropriation of these functions by other authorities or officials shall be prohibited.

Article 16 of the said Law provides the guarantees of the independence of a prosecutor which shall be guaranteed by the following:

1)                     special procedures of appointment and dismissal and of holding a prosecutor disciplinary liable;

2)                     procedures of powers exercising stipulated in the procedural and other laws;

3)                     prohibition of illegal influence, pressure and interference with the exercise of a public prosecutor's powers;

4)                     statutory procedures for financing and organizational support for the public prosecution service;

5)                     appropriate financial, social and pension support for prosecutors;

6)                     functioning of the prosecutorial self-governance institutions;

7)                     personal security arrangements for a public prosecutor, members of his families, his property, as well as other legal safeguards which are provided by Law.

According to part 5 of the same Article, a public prosecutor may submit a statement about a threat to his independence to the Council of Public Prosecutors of Ukraine which shall be obliged to make an immediate check and consider such statement with his participation and within its authority, which is established by this Law, take the necessary measures to eliminate a threat.

3.                      Are there any indicators, formal or informal, used in your country in order to assess the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors, for example, the number of cases considered, the length of the consideration, the complexity of the cases considered etc.? Please briefly describe.

The appropriate form for calculation of work results and the methods of forming statistic data with the usage of the information systems and comparative analysis of different reporting forms by public prosecution authorities, law enforcement bodies and judicial authorities has been established in Ukraine.

The reporting form is set up in accordance with the sectorial principle for each type of the prosecutorial and investigative activity.

The main criteria for evaluation the prosecutorial and investigative activity in this regard are the following:

-                        reliability of presenting results of the prosecutorial and investigative activity in primary documents and respective reporting forms;

-                        taking measures for improvement of forms and methods of work organisation concerning the maintenance of the Unified Register of the Pre-Trial Investigations;

-                        comprehensive review of statistic data aiming to ensure legality and coordination of law-enforcement authorities in the sphere of crime prevention.

At the present, the measures for implementation of the total electronic document management and cases consideration are being taken. Particularly, it is suggested to create an appropriate unified information and communication system aiming to improve the interaction between the electronic information sources of work of public prosecution authorities with another law-enforcement bodies and judicial authorities.

In order to make qualitative and effective evaluation of work results it is suggested to develop and implement the complex informational analytical system which is connected with the electronic justice and will provide safe data protection from unapproved access of unauthorised persons. Such criteria as a matter complexity, duration of its consideration etc. are to be set up.

The informal indicators in work of the public prosecution authorities of Ukraine are not used today. At the same time, the Department plans to set up the public on-line system for inquiry and evaluation of level of people`s satisfaction by work performed by the public prosecution authorities of Ukraine.

4.                      Is there a formal or informal procedure for evaluation of the work of prosecutors, how often it is evaluated, by whom, and with what consequences? Do the prosecutors have the right to raise formal or informal objections to the results of the evaluation and to its consequences?

Some definite procedures for evaluation of the work of prosecutors were provided by the Law of Ukraine “On the Public Prosecution Service” of 2014 while determination of the new basis of organisation and functioning of the public prosecution authorities.

In particular, the Law provides functioning of self-governance authorities which is exercised through the All-Ukrainian Conference of Public Prosecutors and the Council of Public Prosecutors of Ukraine (the provisions regarding the functioning of the prosecutorial self-governance will become valid on April 15, 2016). The prosecutorial self-governance is also carried out with the aim to improve the quality of a prosecutor`s work.

Furthermore, determination of professional preparation level of persons who have shown their intention to take a prosecutor`s position is included to the authority of the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Public Prosecutors (will be formed after the begging of functioning of the self-governance authorities of prosecutors).

In particular, the Law provides the evaluation of a professional level in the course of competitive selection for reassignment of a prosecutor to a prosecutor’s office of the higher level. The competitive selection procedure is determined by the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Public Prosecutors.

Moreover, the National Academy of Prosecutors of Ukraine is functioning under the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine and is the state authority with the special status which puts into practise the preparation of candidates for a prosecutor`s position (at the stage of their selection to public prosecution authorities) and the courses of professional training for prosecutors who already work.

A head of a respective body of a public prosecution authority ensures the requirements as for the professional training of prosecutors.

The assessment of work results takes place at the public prosecution authorities of Ukraine. Particularly, part 5 of the Order of the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine No. 1гн dated November 26, 2011 “On Organization of Work and Management at the Public Prosecution Authorities of Ukraine” the following criteria of evaluation of work of the public prosecution authorities of Ukraine are implemented: observance of the Constitution of Ukraine and the Ukrainian legislation while performing prosecutorial functions, ensuring due work organisation, fullness and timeliness of measures which taken to remove legality infringement, real renew of citizens’ rights and freedoms and the State`s legal interests, remuneration of inflicted damage and bringing guilty persons to liability stated by law.

Results of work of subordinate public prosecution service authorities are evaluated by the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine and by regional public prosecution service authorities while making complex sectorial inspection, providing practical support, taking measures of analytical, training and methodological kinds. The stated measures can be planned or unplanned.

Subsequent to an inspection results, a prosecutor can agree with them or introduce his grounded objections.

5.                      As regards the fight against organised crime and terrorism, are there any specific conditions, criteria, procedures or indicators created for prosecutors in your country in order to:

a. facilitate their work?

b. evaluate their work?

The Constitution of Ukraine and the Law of Ukraine “On the Public Prosecution Service” authorise the public prosecution service to supervise over law observance of authorities which carry out operative and search activity, inquiry and pre-trial investigation. Whilst, a prosecutor exercises his rights and performs duties provided by the Law of Ukraine “On Operative and Search Activity” and by the Criminal Procedural Code of Ukraine.

The Prosecutor General, heads of regional and local authorities of public prosecution, their first deputies and deputies according to an allocation of duties, while supervision over law observance of authorities which carry out operative and search activity, inquiry and pre-trial investigation, coordinate activity of law-enforcement agencies of a respective level in the sphere of crime prevention.

Prosecutors exercise their coordination authorities though common work meetings, establishing interdepartmental working groups, and also by conducting coordinated events and doing analytical work.

The procedure for organisation and coordination activity of law-enforcement bodies, interconnection of the public prosecution authorities with the crime prevention subjects are defined by provisions, which are approved by a common order of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine, heads of another law-enforcement agencies and should be registered at the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine.

6.                      Are there in your country recent legislative reforms to fight more effectively against organised crime and terrorism and how are these reforms seen in relation to the quality and efficiency of the work of prosecutors? Please briefly describe.

In addition to the recent legislative amendments in the sphere of work of public prosecution service, the Plan of Realisation of the Strategy for Reforming the Judicial System, Legal Procedure and the Adjoining Law Institutions for 2015-2020, which provides the complex of events connected with increase of prosecutors` work quality and the criteria of evaluation of their performance effectiveness was approved by the Decree of the President of Ukraine No. 275/2015 dated May 20, 2015.

In particular, the following events are prescribed:

-     paragraph 8.2.2 “On implementing and Modernisation of System for the (Primary) Preparation of Candidates for Their Appointment to a Position of a Prosecutor”;

-     paragraph 8.2.3 “On Modernisation and Ensuring Appropriate Undergoing of Professional Training Courses”;

-     paragraph 8.2.4 “On Implementing of an Appropriate System of Evaluation of Quality of the Work of a Prosecutor for Improvement of Personnel Policy”

-     paragraph 8.2.5 “On Implementing an Appropriate System of Evaluation of Efficiency (Productivity) of a Public Prosecution Service for Enhancement of the Institutional Role”

The designated executors of the mentioned events are the Qualification and Disciplinary Commission of Public Prosecutors, the National Academy of Prosecutors of Ukraine, the Council of Public Prosecutors of Ukraine and the Prosecutor General`s Office of Ukraine.

7.                      Do you consider that current international conventions, as well as international organisations, like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol, are sufficient to effectively fight against organised crime and terrorism?

International conventions, and also the international organisations like Eurojust, Europol and Interpol are the important international instruments for combatting with organised crime and terrorism.

In particular, Ukraine, realising the urgent problems which are the consequence of the organised international crime, especially terrorism, human trafficking etc., have made an Agreement between the European Police Office and Ukraine on Strategic Co-operation.

The arrangements have been also reached with the Europol about making an agreement on operative co-operation which aimed to extent respective cooperation of parties. Particularly, the agreement provides the organisation of co-operation between Ukraine and the Europol for the purpose of support the member states of the European Union in prevention and combatting with the organised crime, terrorism and another forms of international crime, particularly by means of exchange of information between Ukraine and the Europol.

In addition, at the present time there is the completion of execution of procedures which are necessary for the signing preparation of the Co-operation Agreement between Ukraine and Eurojust.

The said international document will create the legal basis for Ukraine for using the possibilities of Eurojust as for the improvement of international co-operation in the course of a criminal proceedings, particularly for the prompt information exchange, co-ordination of actions in countering transnational crimes and for assisting evidence gathering.

Such co-operation will take the efficiency of the common work of law-enforcement agencies and the member states of the European Union while investigating criminal offences, particularly of transnational kind, including computer crimes, fraud and corruption, money laundering and human trafficking, to a new level.

Co-operation of the Ukrainian law-enforcement agencies with the competent authorities of foreign countries as for solving issues of combatting with crimes which have the transnational character or go beyond the Ukrainian border also takes place through the Interpol National Central Bureau which represents Ukraine in the International Criminal Police Organization (Interpol) and constitutes the centre of coordination between the State`s law-enforcement agencies and competent authorities of foreign countries as for solving issues of combatting with crime which have the transnational character or go beyond the Ukrainian border.



[1]Based on the time factor for the consideration of the acts, and bonification system, depending on the complexity of case.

[2] It should be noted that currently the total staff number of the prosecution service of the Russian Federation is over 48 thousand people, including more than 33 thousand prosecutors. The population of the Russian Federation is some 145 million people.

[3] It should be noted that the law provides for payment of percentage additions to prosecutors for scientific degree and academic rank in the corresponding speciality.

[4] The Chief Prosecutor from the USSR at the Nuremberg Trials.