PERMANENT COUNCIL OF THE OEA/Ser.G
ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES CP/CSH-1784/17
31 March 2017
COMMITTEE ON HEMISPHERIC SECURITY Original: Spanish
PRELIMINARY REPORT ON THE REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE TO EVALUATE THE LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HEMISPHERIC PLAN OF ACTION AGAINST TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME
DEPARTMENT AGAINST TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME
(DTOC)
SECRETARIAT FOR MULTIDIMENSIONAL SECURITY
(SMS)
APRIL 2017
3
PRELIMINARY REPORT ON THE REPLIES TO THE QUESTIONNAIRE TO EVALUATE THE LEVEL OF IMPLEMENTATION OF THE HEMISPHERIC PLAN OF ACTION AGAINST TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME
DEPARTMENT AGAINST TRANSNATIONAL ORGANIZED CRIME
(DTOC)
SECRETARIAT FOR MULTIDIMENSIONAL SECURITY
(SMS)
APRIL 2017
Contents
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3
II. INTRODUCTION 7
III. GENERAL OBJECTIVE 9
IV. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES 9
V. METHODOLOGY 10
VI. ANALYSIS 11
A. National strategies 14
B. Legal instruments 20
C. Law enforcement-related matters 23
D. Training 27
E. Information sharing 29
F. International cooperation and assistance 31
G. General information for the process of revising or updating the PoA 36
VII. FINDINGS 40
I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The chief purpose of this report is to reveal the level of implementation of the Hemispheric Plan of Action against Transnational Organized Crime (PoA-TOC) and to provide the member states with inputs for analysis based on official, updated information to inform its future updating. To achieve that, it provides information that was furnished directly by the countries through their answers to the questionnaire and was then organized into Excel spreadsheets. That method of organizing the information was used on account of the wide range of formats in which the questionnaire responses were received. In light of the official status of the sources, the information was not verified or validated in terms of its comprehensiveness, completeness, or exactness by the DTOC’s group of specialists.
The information furnished by the countries enabled the preparation of this report, which will be an important element in allowing the Committee on Hemispheric Security (CHS) to analyze the progress made and challenges still pending with the implementation of the PoA-TOC.
Although the report is organized in accordance with the sections of the questionnaire that the member states answered, this executive summary gathers together the main findings on the level of implementation of the PoA-TOC in the different regions of the Hemisphere. It should be noted that of the 34 OAS member states, 19 submitted responses to the questionnaire.
The first finding that arises from the information provided is that 14 countries believe that the best way to deal with TOC is through the design and implementation of comprehensive strategies or programs to prevent and combat this criminal phenomenon. Addressing TOC remains essentially a matter for state action, with low participation by and cooperation from nongovernmental organizations. At the same time, the approach taken appears largely to favor prosecution. Eight of the 19 countries that responded to the questionnaire said that their strategies or programs entailed a component of prevention.
The second notable finding is that although a majority of the countries (14 out of 19) believe that the best way to tackle TOC is through the design and implementation of comprehensive national strategies or programs, only eight countries said that they had a national authority with responsibility for the topic. The absence of a person responsible for guiding, implementing, deciding on, and responding to the implementation of a comprehensive national strategy or program could be seen as a sign of its weakness. This is compounded by the fact that responsibility for and leadership of the comprehensive national strategy or program lies with different public institutions, according to the country in question. Each institution will have its own “professional bias” which, in turn, could affect the implementation, results, and impact of the comprehensive national strategy or program.
The third relevant finding is the existence of a high level of adhesion to the main international agreements that address the topic. This provides the countries with a common regulatory framework and serves as a reference point for guiding the preparation of laws, strategies, plans, and actions within each country.
A fourth important finding reveals that most of the countries (18) have mechanisms for protecting victims and witnesses that can, in 17 cases, be described as broadly accessible: in other words, any person can be considered for them provided that he or she meets certain minimum conditions and basic requirements. Another decisive variable is the budgetary resources allocated. The fact that 18 countries already have victim and witness protection mechanisms would therefore allow a second step to be taken (since it is no longer necessary to focus on the adoption of mechanisms of that kind) and to begin understanding and learning about how those mechanisms operate in order to help improve their effectiveness and sustainability. Moreover, the existence of those mechanisms would facilitate horizontal transfers of cooperation between those countries already making use of those mechanisms with proven effectiveness to make them available to countries still without them.
A fifth important finding is that 16 of the 19 states have measures to ensure the security, control, and integrity of travel and identity documents. This offers another possibility for horizontal exchanges of experiences among countries to help improve the effectiveness of their measures.
This report’s sixth major finding deals with training and exchanges of information related to TOC. With the exception of financial intelligence, the training provided by the states tends to be sporadic and isolated and is not sustained over time. Given that this is a criminal phenomenon with the principal characteristic of constant adaptation and evolution, work is needed on stable, updated, and constant training programs. The countries’ responses seem to indicate that there is room for working on and improving the mechanisms for and practice of exchanges of information between the countries, within the frameworks set by national laws and paying particular attention to information security protocols. The area where there are the closest relations and coordination among the countries is extradition (18 countries reported having policies or agreements addressing that topic). In contrast, lower levels of exchanges between the countries were detected with respect to special investigation techniques (SITs) (11 countries).
A seventh important finding, in the field of international cooperation and assistance, was the existence of an urgent need for training on key topics such as special investigation techniques and the management of joint investigation teams; exchanges of experiences on asset management and the disposal of property; training for police officers and prosecutors, and exchanges of training in that area; and the establishment of agreements for the relocation of witnesses. In addition, it can be seen that although all the countries that responded have signed the Palermo Convention, there is still room for improving the levels of international cooperation on mutual legal assistance in the Hemisphere.
The eighth significant finding is that the countries’ responses indicate that there is no consensus regarding the need to review or update the Hemispheric Plan of Action: five countries said they did not support reviewing or updating it, and a further five expressed no opinion on the issue.
II. INTRODUCTION
In October 2006, by means of resolution CP/RES. 908 (1567/06), the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States (OAS) adopted the Hemispheric Plan of Action against Transnational Organized Crime. That Hemispheric Plan, within the framework of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime and its Protocols, sets out a series of actions designed to bolster cooperation in preventing, investigating, prosecuting, and punishing illicit activities related to transnational organized crime and to build national, subregional, and regional capacities for tackling it.
The Working Group on the Hemispheric Plan of Action against Transnational Organized Crime, which was installed by the Committee on Hemispheric Security on January 14, 2016, decided that since almost ten years had passed since the Plan of Action’s adoption, it was necessary to examine the current situation as regards its implementation in the member states and, in particular, to determine the extent to which it has influenced the states’ laws and regulatory frameworks.
To that end, the Working Group instructed the Department of Public Security (DPS) of the OAS Secretariat for Multidimensional Security (SMS) to design a questionnaire in order to gather relevant, updated information on the progress made and the challenges facing the member states in implementing the Plan of Action. In addition, the questionnaire has a section where the member states can offer suggestions if they think that the Plan of Action requires updates or modifications.
In compliance with the instructions received, the DPS designed a draft questionnaire and presented it to the delegations. It was approved by the Committee on Hemispheric Security on April 21, 2016, and distributed to the member states by means of a verbal note dated May 10, 2016. July 21, 2016, was set as the deadline for returning replies.
The Secretary General’s Executive Order 16-01, which came into force in January 2016, created the Department against Transnational Organized Crime (DTOC). The functions assigned to the new department include monitoring the implementation of the Hemispheric Plan of Action against Transnational Organized Crime (PoA-TOC), including following up on the responses to the questionnaire addressed in this report. DTOC specialists tabulated the member states’ responses and analyzed the level of compliance with the PoA-TOC, in order to provide relevant, updated information for the CHS to be able to analyze the progress made and the pending challenges.
As of the original deadline (July 21, 2016), only nine member states had sent their responses to the questionnaire; the Committee on Hemispheric Security therefore agreed on an extension until October 14, 2016. However, upon the expiration of the extended deadline, only twelve questionnaires had been returned, as a result of which the Committee agreed to a second extension with a deadline of October 28, 2016.
As of November 10, 2016, replies had been received from the following 16 member states: Argentina, Belize, Bolivia, Brazil, Canada, Costa Rica, Chile, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Trinidad and Tobago, and Venezuela. Grenada sent an e-mail providing some general information related to certain sections of the questionnaire, but it did not return the questionnaire with detailed responses.
In light of the number of questionnaires returned (16), the CHS decided that it did not have enough information to conduct an analysis with a level of detail that would provide the member states a complete overview of the Plan of Action’s hemispheric implementation. It therefore agreed on a further extension of the deadline, allowing those countries that had not yet done so to return their questionnaire responses up until January 31, 2017. As of February 21, 2017, a total of 19 replies had been received, including those of Colombia, the Dominican Republic, and Ecuador. A final extension until February 28, 2017, was granted (see Figure 1).
III. GENERAL OBJECTIVE
To reveal the level of implementation of the Hemispheric Plan of Action against Transnational Organized Crime (PoA-TOC) and to provide the member states with inputs for assessing its future updates based on official, up-to-date information.
IV. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES
1. Tabulate the data returned by the OAS member states in each section of the PoA-TOC evaluation questionnaire.
2. Produce relevant and updated information based on the data supplied in the questionnaire responses, so the CHS can analyze the progress made and pending challenges in the implementation of the PoA.
3. Support the CHS in consolidating the recommendations and requests made by the OAS member states through the PoA evaluation questionnaire, which will be used as an input for the next Meeting of National Authorities on Transnational Organized Crime.
4. Support decision-making processes so that the information provided and analyzed by the CHS leads to actions geared toward supporting the implementation of the Palermo Convention in the member states.
V. METHODOLOGY
In preparing this report, a storage facility was set up for the files collected in response to the request for information, given that some of the countries, in addition to the questionnaires, also provided additional files, such as laws and regulations, as part of their replies.
The information provided in the questionnaires was input into Excel spreadsheets. That method of organizing the information was used on account of the wide range of formats in which the questionnaire responses were received. Because it came from official sources, the information was not verified or validated in terms of its comprehensiveness, completeness, or exactness by the DTOC’s group of specialists. The information provided by the member states was incorporated into the spreadsheets without any modifications. Both the questionnaires and the spreadsheets were incorporated into this report’s annexes.
The information from the spreadsheets was used to prepare charts to illustrate the member states’ levels of compliance with the implementation of the PoA-TOC.
Once the information had been consolidated on the spreadsheets, specific analyses of the answers were performed based on the questionnaire’s thematic dimensions. That information has been made available to the CHS to be used as an input in its decision-making regarding the Plan of Action.
Finally, a consolidated report on the answers and supporting documents based on the Palermo Convention and its Protocols was produced.
VI. ANALYSIS
Number of countries that returned questionnaires.
Figure 1. Countries that returned questionnaire responses.
Figure 2. Nineteen questionnaires were submitted by CHS contact points.
Figure 2 shows that 19 of a possible total of 34 questionnaires were received, representing slightly more than half of the OAS member states. The figure below shows the breakdown of the questionnaires received by subregions. Comparatively, there is a pronounced difference between the CARICOM countries that responded and those that did not.