1. PHASE 3 – PROSECUTION AND COURTS TRAINING
Paul Smit
DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS
PHASE 3 – PROSECUTION AND COURTS TRAINING
Round-up of Training Sessions
Podgorica, 2 – 4 February 2011

2. SESSION 1 - Participants
Representatives of:
Ministry of Justice - Judicial and prosecutorial offices
Judicial Council
Supreme Prosecution Office
General Prosecution Office

3. SESSION 2: Overview of the Criminal Justice System and Statistics
Prosecution offices and Courts districts cooperate in the production of crime statistics, especially with the development of the CMS.
MONSTAT seemed to have a minor role in the production of these statistics. However, participants stressed that MONSTAT has not a minor role, it periodically produces data on Prosecution and Courts in line with EUROSTAT standard.
There is a closer cooperation with prosecution offices, courts districts and MONSTAT MONSTAT periodically sends them files to be filled in with data. MONSTAT works on these files to be aligned with the standard at European level.
MONSTAT will have a relevant role in implementing the suggestions proposed during this training with regard especially to the CMS.

4. SESSION 3: COUNTING RULES
Prosecution offices and courts districts already have written documents defining how to record crime in prosecution and courts statistics.
What is lacking is a coordination with police for a common understanding of counting rules.

5. MONTENEGRO DESIRED SITUATION ON COUNTING RULES
Written counting rules for standardised crime recording should cover at least the topics below:
Counting Unit
Principal Offence Rule
Principal Sanction Rule
Counting of multiple offences (serial offending)
Counting of multiple offenders
Definition of recidivism
We suggest what is currently most often done may be the best starting point for formalising written rules.

6. PILOT DATA COLLECTION EXERCISE (PROSECUTION AND COURTS)
In Montenegro data on age for persons prosecuted are classified in:
< 14 (children); 14 to 16 (minors); 14 to 18 (adult minors) and >18 (adults). More detailed information can be obtained manually in the case files.
In Montenegro data on citizenship are classified in:
Montenegrin and other (foreigners)
In Montenegro it is not possible to collect data on ethnicity (nationality).
In Montenegro data on recidivism are not available in prosecution and courts statistics but in the registers there is this information.
In Montenegro data on sanctions imposed to convicted persons are available but in different breakdowns than those included in the PDCE.
Data on persons sentenced
For Courts statistics the counting unit is not the person but the case, so they can get the abovementioned info only manually from registers.

7. SECTION 6: PUBLICATION OF RESULTS, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION
It has been suggested to include further description of how the prosecution and courts statistics are produced within the Criminal Justice System in the Annual Reports (both in the Montenegrin and English versions).

8. SECTION 7: CASE MANAGEMENTE SYSTEM
In Montenegro, both courts districts and prosecution offices have just developed a CMS. It has been introduced in 2009 and in January 2010 all court districts and prosecution offices have started to use the new CMS but for the purposes of producing statistics only in 2011.

9. SUGGESTED SHORT TERM GOALS 1
Set up a Coordinating Working Group on Crime and Criminal Justice Statistics
– To define its members (police, prosecutor, courts, Statistics Office of Montenegro, Ministry of Justice, representatives of Academia)
– To have a meeting before the next training
– To start work on drafting the recording and counting rules.
2. Share information on existing procedures to count and record crimes for inclusion in prosecution and courts statistics with police in order to obtain better coordination with the police statistics.
Deadline? in time for the follow-up mission (April 2011).

10. SUGGESTED SHORT TERM GOALS 2
3. Compile the Pilot Data collection Exercise for Prosecution and courts Statistics making clear a) how far local offence definitions and definitions of persons prosecuted and of persons convicted comply with the standard definition provided by UN and b) which data on persons prosecuted and convicted could be routinely supplied for which offences.
Deadline? in time for the follow-up mission (April 2011).
4. Discuss with other agencies (MONSTAT) and clearly define what kind of data would need to be extracted from the prosecution and courts CMS and for what area.

11. SUGGESTED LONG TERM GOALS
Harmonize the written counting rules across the different agencies of the Criminal Justice System (prosecution, courts and police) .
2. Examine the possibilities of establishing a central register that could lead to the introduction and use of IFN (the existing registers could be the starting point).
4. They already have publications connected with the Judiciary (if the figures are different from the Pros & courts statistics then coordination is needed).

12. PHASE 3 – PROSECUTION AND COURTS TRAINING
Paul Smit
DEVELOPMENT OF MONITORING INSTRUMENTS FOR JUDICIAL AND LAW ENFORCEMENT INSTITUTIONS IN THE WESTERN BALKANS
PHASE 3 – PROSECUTION AND COURTS TRAINING
Round-up of Training Sessions
Podgorica, 2 – 4 February 2011