World Bank Document
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PROJECT INFORMATION DOCUMENT (PID) APPRAISAL STAGE Report No.: AB4987 Justice Services Improvement Project II Project Name Public Disclosure Authorized Region LATIN AMERICA AND CARIBBEAN Sector Law and justice (100%) Project ID P110752 Borrower(s) REPUBLIC OF PERU Implementing Agency Judiciary of Peru Av. Paseo de la República s/n, Palacio N 4to Piso, Oficina 444 Lima Peru Tel: (51-1) 719-6300 Fax: (51-1) 427-0292 [email protected] Public Disclosure Authorized Environment Category [ ] A [] B [ X] C [ ] FI [ ] TBD (to be determined) Date PID Prepared September 30, 2010 Date of Appraisal January 21, 2010 Authorization Date of Board Approval Expected November 18, 2010 1. Country and Sector Background Peru has maintained a sound macroeconomic framework and, as a result, has been able to benefit from these policies in the form of high growth and significant poverty reduction. Between 2004- 2008, Peru's GDP grew at an average rate of 7.6% and, by 2008, the year before the onset of the Public Disclosure Authorized economic crisis, it reached 9.8%, among the strongest growth performances in Latin America and the Caribbean. Fast economic growth has been accompanied by poverty reduction and job creation. Poverty declined from 48.6% in 2004 to 34.8% in 2009, a decline of 13.8 percentage points. While inequality remains high, Peru is making progress in addressing it. Economic growth decelerated sharply in 2009, as a result of the global crisis, but remained positive. The World Bank Group’s Country Partnership Strategy (CPS) for 2007-2011 (Report No. 37913- PE) discussed by the Executive Directors on December 19, 2006 outlines three pillars reflecting Peru’s strategy for development: (i) Economic Growth; (ii) Social Development; and (iii) Modernization of the State1. While justice sector reform cuts across each of the three pillars, the CPS explicitly recognizes the need to improve the justice system and reduce corruption within the context of modernizing the State and service delivery. In particular, Peru’s Ministry of Economy and Finance (MEF) has requested Bank support for a follow-on, second stage project Public Disclosure Authorized to: (i) scale-up components under the first project (which focused only on 10 out of 29 judicial districts); (ii) provide technical assistance for the implementation of Peru’s new criminal procedural code (CPC) which was adopted by Congress in 2006 and introduces oral proceedings 1 See Country Partnership Strategy for the Republic of Peru 2007-11 (Report No. 37913-PE). and greater transparency in both investigative and adjudication processes; (iii) continue with improvements in professionalizing human resources management; and (iv) strengthen access to justice in rural and peri-urban areas. Peru’s Justice Sector The proposed Justice Services Improvement II Project (the “Project”) involves the justice sector’s key agencies: (i) Judiciary; (ii) Ministry of Justice; (iii) National Judicial Council; (iv) Judicial Academy; and (v) Attorney General’s Office (AGO). Below is a brief explanation of their mandates and some of the recent sector developments as well as continuing challenges. The Judiciary is in charge of administering justice through a hierarchy of courts in the country. It is comprised of: (i) a supreme court, (ii) appellate courts, (iii) trial courts, and (iv) formal justice of the peace courts. The Judiciary is governed by an Executive Council and a presiding justice of the supreme court—the Chief Justice. Services of the Judiciary are delivered in each of the country’s 29 judicial districts, which have a corresponding territorial district. The Ministry of Justice (MINJUS) is a part of the Executive branch and oversees the sector’s development in broad terms. It proposes reviews of the legislative framework and is responsible for providing Public Defender services and free legal services to the citizenry. The National Judicial Council (Consejo Nacional de la Magistratura—CNM) is in charge of selecting and appointing judges and prosecutors, except when their position is filled through election. The decisions of the CNM regarding the assessment and ratification of judges are not subject to judicial review, and the CNM is an autonomous institution, not dependent on the Judiciary. The Judicial Academy (Academia de la Magistratura—AMAG) forms a part of the Judiciary and is in charge of the instruction and training of judges and prosecutors at all levels. Its Board of Directors is comprised by two Supreme Court judges, two Supreme Court prosecutors, a representative of the CNM and its Director General. An indispensable requirement for promotion is having passed the specialized training required by the Judicial Academy. The Attorney General’s Office (AGO, or in Spanish, the Ministerio Público – Fiscalía de la Nación) has functioned as an independent institution in Peru’s justice sector since 1981. Fiscales do not represent the government; this role is carried out by another group of government attorneys called Procuradores (or state attorneys under the Ministry of Justice). Instead, the fiscales or prosecutors’ role is to oversee the investigation of criminal activity and represent the interests of society to prosecute potential wrongdoing. Recent Sector Developments In 2008-09, procedural changes were introduced by the new criminal procedure code (CPC), which was formally passed by Congress in 2006. The new CPC included the gradual expansion of the fiscales’ role in criminal proceedings. It makes the fiscal responsible for overseeing the investigation and conducting the prosecution of alleged crimes. Checks on any abuses of these powers, especially as regards the violation of due process rights, will be provided by a new category of judges – the jueces de garantía -- whose authorization is needed for arrest warrants, searches and seizures, use of pre-trial detention and similar actions. (It bears mentioning that under the prior system, there was no comparable check on the instructional judge’s ability to undertake such actions as part of his/her investigation). Fiscales, in coordination with these and the trial judges, will also be able to recommend abbreviated proceedings and alternative sentencing. Also in 2009, a Judicial Ethics Commission was established as part of the Judiciary’s Internal Anticorruption Office, known as the “OCMA” (Oficina de Control de la Magistratura). The Commission will work with a software that permits cross-checking data related to the declaration of assets by judges and other judicial personnel and can recommend cases to the OCMA, or CNM in case of a justice of the supreme court. Challenges Facing the Sector Despite advances in criminal procedural reform and more transparent processes, Peru’s justice sector still faces several challenges. Although court management models were developed under the Bank’s first Justice Services Improvement Project and performance contracts were introduced in 10 (out of the 29) judicial districts of the Judiciary, there remains considerable room for improvement. Corruption continues to present a serious problem--essentially two types of economic barriers are faced by users: official costs and indirect or informal costs. Official costs include court costs and attorney fees, while indirect or informal costs include the litigant’s opportunity costs for the time invested in the process or bribes to accelerate a process. Both types of costs place a heavy burden on the financial resources of the poor. Even when court fees are waived for poor litigants there are unavoidable costs, such as travel expenses for the rural population, opportunity costs for hours not worked, and attorney fees. Another challenge for the sector is poor technical and professional development. Although the Judiciary and the Attorney General’s Office (AGO) have the authority to fill vacancies directly, the Judicial Council (CNM) is the sector institution in charge of selecting and appointing judges and prosecutors. However, despite some progress in better evaluating the quality of judicial decisions, no effective and permanent systems are in place for the selection, performance evaluation, training, and removal of judicial staff. Objective criteria for these processes are also absent. The recently adopted Judicial Career Law seeks to bring about improvements in these areas by focusing on merit-based selection and regular examinations and evaluations. A related challenge to professional development is that of weak accountability mechanisms--corrupt behavior is both a cause and result of judicial inefficiency. In the fight against corruption, the Judiciary has made some progress in detecting and exposing cases of corruption through its Internal Anti-corruption Office (OCMA). One of the greatest challenges faced by Peru’s justice sector was a lack of coordination between key agencies, a notable achievement of the first Bank-supported project (approved in 2004). This coordination has resulted in the rationalization of services and the joint determination of sector-wide priorities such as the adoption of a Judicial Career Law. Such coordination is critical for the effective implementation of the CPC as it requires substantially different responsibilities for judges and prosecutors, requiring separate as well as coordinated training, and a specialized selection process for personnel. 2. Objectives The Project development objective of the proposed Justice Services Improvement Project II (the “Project”) is to improve the quality of service delivery in the 5 participating institutions