Is there the possibility for witnesses and penfffl to obtain toga)

assistance at this (these) stages?

See the reply to question 10.

18. What is the procedure for admittance to a protection programme?
Please specify, in particular, who takes the initiative, the criteria for
admittance, the assessment of the relevance of a testimony and
how admittance to the programme is formalised.

The procedure for requesting, the placement of a witness in the Program for relocation in the community is that an application is submitted to OEO by the federal prosecuting office (United States Attorney's Office). As a screening mechanism, OEO requires that the application be endorsed by the chief prosecutor in that office, the United States Attorney. On rare occasions, witnesses who are to testify before United States legislative bodies on sensitive matters are protected through the Program, and in such cases, the legislative body is required to submit the application. An assessment of the danger to the witness, including details concerning why there is no

alternative to Program placement, and an assessment of the danger the witness would pose to the general public in a relocation community is prepared by the field office of the investigative agency involved in the case, and forwarded to its HQ for endorsement and forwarding to OEO, as required by OEO, as a further screening mechanism. The witness and adult family members are evaluated by a psychologist, as mandated by the Reform Act, the report of which is used by OEO in making an assessment of whether they will pose a risk to the public, if relocated. The psychological evaluation is arranged by OEO upon receipt of the application. The witness is interviewed by the USMS, which is the agency within the DOJ that administers the day-to-day operation of the Program for witnesses relocated in the community. OEO also arranges that interview, upon receipt of the application. The USMS provides a report to OEO on any problems it discovers which could affect the adjustment of the witness in the Program, or which need to be addressed before relocation occurs. All of the above documents are thoroughly reviewed and screened by OEO; the approval process consists of four levels of review. The Associate Director in OEO who is the head of the Program makes the final determination on whether to authorise Program services. If the Program is deemed necessary and appropriate, a memorandum authorising Program services is sent to the USMS, in which any contingencies to participation in the Program, such as counselling, are detailed.

The procedure for requesting placement of prisoner-witnesses in the Program is that an application from the federal prosecuting office is submitted, as well as an assessment of the danger to the witness by the investigative agency, as detailed above. Upon receipt of those documents, an assessment is made by OEO, as stated previously, as to the necessity of authorising Program services while the prisoner is incarcerated. If the Program is deemed necessary, a memorandum authorising Program services is sent to BOP, which is the agency within DOJ that administers the day-to-day operation of the Program for prisoner-witnesses. If family members of a prisoner-witness are endangered as a result of the prisoner's co-operation, they can receive protection through the Program by the USMS while the prisoner is incarcerated. The family members are normally included in the application submitted for the prisoner-witness, but if not, a written request from the federal prosecutor requesting their Program placement is required. The investigative agency that submitted the assessment of the danger to the witness must submit an assessment of the danger to the witness's family as a result of the witness's co-operation, including details concerning why there is no alternative to use of the Program for the family members, and an assessment of the risk the adult family members would pose to the general public in the relocation community. The family members are evaluated by a psychologist, and interviewed by the USMS, as detailed in the preceding paragraph concerning relocated witnesses, and the same review process at OEO occurs. When prisoner-witnesses are due to be

released from custody, the case is evaluated to determine if the relocation services of the Program, as provided by the USMS, are warranted. The same factors are taken into consideration as with witnesses being relocated in the community initially, with the exception that the significance of the case and testimony are not evaluated again, and if a witness has family in the Program and will be joining that family, the threat is not evaluated, unless the witness would pose a risk to the community. If that is the case, the current threat is evaluated, and that is weighed against the risk the witness would pose to the public.

In order for a witness to qualify for participation in the Program, the case must be extremely significant, there must be an intention that the witness testify (informants are not protected through the Program), the witness's testimony must be crucial to the success of the prosecution, and the threat to the witness must be such that there is no alternative to placement of the witness in the Program.

19. Please indicate the measures that can be adopted for the
_i protection of witnesses and pentiti (e.g. surveillance of the

Residence, physical protection, protection of personal records, relocation, change of identity, subsidies, assistance in job search, relocation of a detainee to another prison or to special units.)

Among the services that the USMS provides to witnesses relocated in the community are relocation in a secure community, under a new identity. Further information concerning services provided can be provided on a need-to-know basis. The marshals who deal with relocated witnesses (Witness Security Inspectors) have been specially trained regarding all aspects of their duties.

Measures taken to protect prisoner-witnesses include separation from any known individuals and organisations that present a threat to them. Further information on the services provided can be provided on a need-to-know basis.

20. What can the duration of a protection programme be? Which are
the procedures for assessing the degree of danger for the
witnesses/pentiti and their compliance with the obligations of the
programme? Is it possible to challenge a decision of suspension,
revocation or termination of a protection programme?

Witnesses remain in the Program for protection as long as they abide by the Program's rules. There is no further assessment of the danger to them, while they are in "good standing" in the Program. It is the Program's goal that they be assimilated into the community by 18 months after their authorisation, but this time period is flexible, depending on the circumstances of each

individual witness. The USMS is responsible for determining whether witnesses are complying with Program rules. If witnesses do not abide by the rules and are terminated from the Program, and there is a request that they be reinstated in the Program, a current assessment of the danger to them may be obtained from the investigative agency which provided the original assessment of the danger to the witness. If a witness is terminated from the Program, there is a grievance procedure by which the witness can challenge the decision. The witness presents the reasons for which he/she takes exception to the termination of Program services to the marshal in the witness's area, and the matter proceeds up the supervisory chain in the USMS, reaching headquarters, if necessary. If not resolved at USMS headquarters, it is presented to OEO for review, and OEO has the authority to authorise reinstatement in the Program, if it disagrees with the termination.

d. International co-operation

21. Which measures (e.g. use of modern telecommunications means,
assistance in relocating protected witnesses, exchange of
information between witness protection authorities) have been
adopted in the context of mutual legal assistance in order to
facilitate international co-operation? How are the financial
implications of the international co-operation activities dealt with?

If witnesses in the Program are legitimately needed for interview or testimony in foreign countries, and the appropriate international channels have been used, they are made available, on a reimbursable basis in coordination with any ongoing domestic needs for the witness.

22. Has your country entered international (bilateral or multilateral)
agreements on the protection of witnesses and pentiti? If so,
please indicate what kind of provisions they include.

The United States of America has not entered into such agreements with other countries.

23. How can international co-operation in the field of the protection of
witnesses and pentiti be improved?

International co-operation may be improved by good communication, for example, by having points of contact privately designated who are available, upon request, to listen to and evaluate individual situations and offer help where it is determined to be uniquely suited and tailored to fit the specific needs that arise on a case-by-case basis

if possible, spey t ionship Г/ЛГ f У?t Л

many people are included in this * * ^the ^tness/penfito) how figures on the different kinds of £^at^^orv- Please also provide

international co-operation.

The replies to these questions can be proving л *,,_.

^Mr0V|ded on a need-to-know basis.

More than seven thousand witnesses h-, _L

Program services since the Program's inrff ^{been аи}*^п°^{Г|3ей to receive}
smaller number is actively receiving Ip_n ^{P n In 197}°' ^however- ^{a much}
period of time for assimilation and govern ^{at tNs time}' ™^{е aVerage}

the witness a new start in life, is 22 rZ^l ^{ПаПСЫ assistance}' ^t0 9^ive Program officials at any time if a threat ann \ ^{a WltneSS Can COntaCt the} the witnesses currently entering the pfP^ears-Approximately 30 percent of

have been placed in the Program forw™ ^{are f}°?'.^gn_J ^natlonals- ^who
While many witnesses enter the Proqram Г°^{Пу In Un}'^{ted Stat6S CaSeS}'
enter with their immediate family menS ^Э °^Пе' ^{il iS common for tnem t0}
Occasionally it has been necessary t'Г Л °^{ther perS}°^{nS C}'°^{Se t0 them}-
Program with the witness. ^{place lar}9^{e fami|}y 9^rouP^{s in tne========================}

The replies to these question can be provided on a need-to-know basis.

More then seven thousand witnesses have been authorised to receive Program services since Program’s inception in 1970, however, a much smaller number is actively receiving services at this time. The average period of time for assimilation and government financial assistance, to give the witness a new start in life, is 22 months, but a witness can contact the Program officials at any time if a threat appears. Approximately 30 persent of the witnesses currently entering the Program are foreign nationals, who have been placed in the Program for testimony in United States cases. While many witnesses enter the Program alone, it is common for them to enter with their immediate family members or other persons close to them. Occasionally it has been necessary to place large family groups in the Program with the witness.

^{==========================}

/. Proposals and comments

25. Please provide any comment»;

implementation of the terms o^proposals concerning the

particular, instruments to be SUUT"⁰! °^f I^{е Р}?™ Т '" of witnesses and pentiti.

To the extent possible, the United Statp* ~f a.>■■_■ ^ j

instruments governing protected _wit^^of America avo.dspubl.cly adopted documents connected with the ProqrT!,^{365 and |е}9'^е1у makes all document disclosure laws. By defin^ior? _tt^{X6mpt fr}°^m °^{ther r}°^{Utine PU}?'° programme, the more likely it is to be _De '?^e_f T⁶. ^^Pf^rencv /^{n SUC}J _t^a kill a specific witness, or alternative^ b_vTf^{ed е}'^^{Г Ьу}?°^{Se W},^{hO W}'f ^h_t, credibility among potential witnesses^ l^h°^se,^wh° ^w'^Sh!° ^Un.^df^CU T programme in the future by undermining ^{6ГеЬу defeat the Ut}'"^ty ° future potential witness against them Khv ^PUtati°^{n tO Safe}'^{y pr}°^te? ™\ readily place their fate with or trust а пД °^П' ^P°^{tential w}'^tnef ^езс)° ^not publicly available. This programme and^°f^amm^ ^the

details of which are critically important to make it attract^{especiallv lts} ^putat.on, which is

depends upon faith in the ability to ^ ■? ^P°^SS'^{ble CrUC}'^{al Wltness}^'

it within a small unreviewable

====================

To the extent possible, the United States of America avoids publicly adopted instruments governing protected witnesses and legislatively makes all documents connected with the Program exempt from other routine public document disclosure lаws. By definition, the more transparency in such a programme, the more likely it is to be penetrated either by those who wish to kill a specific witnesses, or alternatively by those who wish to undercut the credibility among potential witnesses and thereby defeat the utility of the programme in the future by undermining its reputation to safely protect any future potential witness against them. In addition, potential witnesses do not readily place their fate with or trust a programme, the details of which are publicly available. This programme and especially its reputation, which is critically important to make it attractive to possible crucial witnesses, depends upon faith in the ability to keep it within a small unreviewable

==========================

governmental unit that can ensure it remains non-transparent and non-penetrable for a very long period of time.

Even among the trusted governmental units that supervise such a programme, most individuals would both be endangered by and also have no need to know all the details of both the old and new identity and location of each witness. Thus, agreements should recognize that each person or organisation involved will not be given all the particulars about a person, but only pertinent generalities where that will suffice, for example regarding true name and age, employment skills, and prior involvement in crime that reflects on danger to a new community.

Since witness protection depends upon the witness not being obvious in their new location, cultural tastes and differences such as language, accent, and behaviour, including religious behaviour that cannot always be easily altered in adults, must be considered and will operationally eliminate many options that would otherwise be politically feasible. Therefore, broad political agreements that bear their own difficulties in obtaining ratification, due to concerns about multi-party transparency and secrecy, appropriate cost sharing and auditing, and permanent administration, including programme admission and termination authorities, may be premature among parties who are not culturally compatible partners. In sum, an acceptable cultural matching of potential partners is an important preliminary consideration.

Thus, an initial discussion and inventory of the related necessary domestic infrastructure needs should not be overlooked. For example, it is hard to operationalise a witness security plan without provisions for the related but less complex and costly domestic witness services described in the reply to question 5, such as a funded plan for physical security at the time the witness testifies, and short term domestically authorised and controlled options for temporary relocation assistance for short periods before and after the testimony that do not involve a change of identification documents or obtaining a new permanent residence and career, and often do not involve physical protection. Other foundational domestic requirements typically include the creation of a designated special police unit devoted to witness security that by law is the only unit to handle and protect witnesses, an exception to any domestic information disclosure law that will protect the government records relating to these witnesses forever against all public and official requests, and domestic laws that criminalise and punish threatened or attempted intimidation, harassment and retaliation against witnesses before, during and after the witnesses have testified.

Once domestic requirements are satisfied by the interested participant nations, then the more difficult international agreements about shared issues need to be negotiated between culturally matched partners. The most obvious shared issues include items such as how much personal data about a witness should be shared and how it will be securely handled by each

country; how the ongoing administrative and witness costs in the receiving country (including basic or necessary cosmetic medical care, job and language training, subsistence and social welfare guarantees) will be shared and reimbursed, and up to what maximum or for how long; what specific new identity and admission papers in the new country will be made available and how those special new identification papers will be handled in the normal record keeping system of the receiving country, and what will happen to the related pre-existing personal records of the witness in the requesting country; and which officials will have the authority (initially and upon review) and under what circumstances to contact the witness, escort the witness to any reopened legal proceedings, or supervise the witness (extending to wide-ranging issues such as the legality of consensually approved remote audio and video alarms, or permitting handgun possession), to terminate the witness's participation in the programme, or to readmit him/her into the programme.

At the same time that international negotiations are proceeding, one way to both address certain urgent and unique situations and highlight the difficult areas that need more formal attention and negotiation is to make provisions for informal pilot project exchanges of a very small number of culturally matched witnesses on an ad hoc basis.

Japan

a. General information

1. Please describe the framework (legal provisions and established
practice) governing the use of measures protecting witnesses and
pentiti.

We have measures to protect witnesses and pentiti regulated by procedural laws and substantive laws.

With regard to procedural laws, the Code of Criminal Procedure provides such measures as follows:

"Article 299-2

When providing the name and address of a witness, expert, interpreter or translator, or evidential documents and articles under the provision of paragraph 1 of the preceding Article a public prosecutor or the counsel may, if he/she deems that there is a danger of acts being committed which will either harm the body or property of the witness, expert, interpreter or translator, or a person whose name appears in the evidential documents or articles, or a relative of such persons, or will intimidate or confuse these people, inform the adverse party to that effect and request careful consideration for not disclosing the address, work address and other information indicating the place of residence of these people to the persons concerned (including the accused) except where necessary in relation to the proof of crime, the investigation of crime or the defence of the accused, and for ensuring that the safety of these people is not threatened.

---

Дата добавления: 2015-10-16