Evaluation of the International Legal Programs Section
4. Key Findings
This section combines information from all lines of evidence and presents the findings according to the broad evaluation issues of relevance and performance.
4.1. Relevance
The evaluation considered the relevance of ILPS with respect to responding to federal government priorities, the continued need for the Section’s activities given the demand for its services; as well as its alignment with federal roles and responsibilities and departmental strategic outcomes.
4.1.1. Responding to Federal Priorities
The activities of ILPS support the Government of Canada’s international priorities relating to justice sector reform through the “whole-of-government” approach for the advancement of Canada’s foreign policy and development assistance agenda. Canada’s foreign policy is an extension of the national interest and is consistent with Canadian values of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. Further to this, the federal government supports international justice sector development and regards it as an essential step for Canada in promoting Canadian values, enhancing its status or prosperity in the international sphere by promoting the rule of law to protect the security and safety of Canadians at home and abroad, and in supporting economic development.
The work of ILPS is grounded in the sharing and transferring of Canadian legal expertise and knowledge regarding the principles of the administration of justice in Canada that contribute to the construction, reform and strengthening of legal systems of other countries. Therefore, in collaboration and in cooperation with GAC, ILPS promotes good governance, the rule of law, respect for human rights, international security, and the administration of public affairs in accordance with the law through the delivery of justice sector technical and institutional capacity building assistance to countries seeking to reform their justice systems.
ILPS’ legal technical assistance initiatives are demonstrably linked to the Government of Canada’s political commitments, foreign policies for specific countries (e.g., JamaicaFootnote 4) or regional specific strategiesFootnote 5, or as a result of a country asking for assistance. By illustration, ILPS’ work on justice reform matters in Mexico was directly linked to a broader foreign policy strategy - the Americas Strategy - which included both a focus on MexicoFootnote 6 as well as the thematic areas of justice and security. Another example would be justice sector reform in the Middle East, particularly in the Palestinian Authority, to build accountable and effective institutions and meet priorities of a future stable and peaceful Palestinian stateFootnote 7. Further to this, all of ILPS’ technical assistance funded projects (e.g., Palestinian Authority and Jamaica) are designed and implemented having adhered to GAC’s identified development priorities.
4.1.2. Continued Need for ILPS
Canada’s extensive experience in the rule of law is often recognized and respected by many foreign countries for its assistance to countries, ministries and institutions to improve their legal systems and enhance security and rule of law for the country’s citizens. Canada is well positioned to provide legal technical assistance abroad because it has an advanced justice system along with the benefits of having both common law and civil law traditions. In an era when justice issues often cross borders and concerns such as organized crime, terrorism and money laundering are prominent, the Government of Canada works closely with other countries to develop transnational responses. Such responses can include providing legal technical assistance and training to other countries to ensure they have strong justice systems so that Canada can work with them to effectively address transnational organized crime and global terrorism.
Key informants highlighted that the provision of legal technical assistance to countries wanting to reform their justice system contributes to the safety and security of Canadians and to the protection of Canadian business interests. They explained that Canadians would be confident investing in a country with a functioning justice system, as there would be a remedy available in the event of any problems. The key informants further noted that the international justice environment is an increasingly important consideration in the development of the Canadian justice system and in promoting more generally Canadian security and prosperity. Particular in this regard are international engagement activities to promote the rule of law as being essential to the Government’s efforts to protect the safety and security of Canadians domestically and abroad.
Within the Department, ILPS serves as a centre of expertise and provides for a coordinated approach to the Departmental contributions to the Government of Canada’s foreign policy as it relates to matters of justice sector reform and capacity building in foreign countries. In addition, ILPS fills a gap within the Department and across the federal government as a centre for both theoretical and practical expertise on international legal technical assistance. Moreover, ILPS is often requested by GAC to provide strategic advice relating to international justice sector development issues. The capacity to provide this type of advice often comes from the experience and knowledge of conducting legal technical assistance work.
ILPS has been providing government-to-government technical assistance because it has the legal expertise in terms of the necessary skill set and competencies, the credibility, and the experience to develop and manage legal technical assistance projects that can be useful to foreign countries seeking to modernize their justice system. The Section can provide substantive legal expertise from a government perspective, and it has access to many experts within the Department from different fields of law and across the government to assist other government institutions. It is appropriate for a government partner such as ILPS to work with a recipient country’s government since it would be government-to-government and would understand the functioning of government, and the challenges it faces. This is a unique niche that only a government entity can provide to another country seeking technical assistance.
Additionally, beneficiaries from recipient countries receiving assistance indicated that there is a need for ILPS to provide legal technical assistance since the recipient country often does not have the resources nor the expertise to upgrade their legal system. Since Canada has an advanced legal system, recipient countries such as Mexico, the Palestinian Authority, and Jamaica have so far benefited from the transfer of knowledge.
Demand for legal technical assistance projects
ILPS has designed and implemented seven (7) new legal technical assistance projects during the evaluation period, of which two of these projects have been extended and the remaining five (5) projects have been completed. See Table 4 for a summary of the technical assistance projects executed by ILPS during the evaluation period.
| Country | Duration | Funding | Main Activities |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ukraine | May 21, 2008 – July 31, 2012 | $5,439,571 | Anti-corruption project through mainly funding extensive research on corruption-related matters by a local research institute. |
| Palestinian Authority | May 6, 2009 – Mar 31, 2014, Extension: Sep 30, 2016 | $16,300,000 | The project provides assistance to the Office of the Attorney General and Public Prosecution (OAG/PP) to:
|
| Mexico (1) | Apr 1, 2010 – Mar 29, 2013 | $1,850,140 | Education and training of judges to increase the judges’ ability to manage the new adversarial system in the courts; assist the Mexican judiciary in developing national and state-level education program for judges; and assist with the modernization of the rules of judicial conduct and disciplinary mechanisms, and reviewing of existing court rules and practices. |
| Mexico (2) | Apr 1, 2010 – Mar 29, 2013 | $1,029,815 | National/State licensing and education systems for lawyers including the development of a system of licensing for lawyers, code of ethics, and education programs for lawyers. |
| Mexico (3) | Apr 1, 2010 – Mar 29, 2013 | $1,231,045 | Harmonization of criminal legislation and strengthening of prosecution services to help the Government of Mexico develop a strategy to strengthen the integrity and quality of the criminal justice system; contribute to the improvement of the services rendered by public prosecutors; and support the creation of a national strategy to establish more coherent criminal procedure through the harmonization of criminal legislation. |
Turks and Caicos Islands (TCI) |
Apr 2010 – Oct 2012 |
$352,040 | To review the TCI Evidence Ordinance and proposed DNA legislation; strengthen the OAG library with legal documentation; and support improvement of document and file management of the OAG. |
| Jamaica | Dec 1, 2011 – Mar 31, 2017, Extension: Mar 31, 2020 | $9,093,849 | Strengthen key areas of the Jamaican justice system including:
|
Figure 1 illustrates the total time spent executing technical assistance projects between 2009-10 and 2013-14, ranging from approximately 12,000 hours to 33,000 hours, or 67% of the total time spent undertaking ILPS functions. There was a marked increase in the number of hours spent on projects in 2011-12 with over 32,000 hours, as all seven projects were in operation during that fiscal year and the Section had a relatively high complement of FTEs. Then 2012-13 had the second highest number of hours spent on projects with almost 21,000 hours. By the end of that year, five of the projects were completed resulting in a decrease in hours in 2013-14 as well as a decrease in the number of FTEs.
Figure 1: Total Hours executing Legal Technical Assistance Projects
Text version – Figure 1: Total Hours executing Legal Technical Assistance Projects 2009-2010 to 2013-2014
Line graph showing the number of hours spent carrying out legal technical assistance projects between 2009-10 and 2013-14.
- In 2009-10, 15958.68 hours
- In 2010-11, a slight decrease to 11769.15 hours
- In 2011-12, an increase to 32287.94 hours
- In 2012-13, a decrease to 20615.34 hours
- In 2013-14, a slight decrease to 15284.79 hours.
Source: iCase Data
Demand for strategic advisory work
ILPS has been involved in providing legal policy development and strategic advice to other government departments, especially to GAC, on matters pertaining to international justice sector reform and assistance, and the integration of the access to justice and the rule of law. As a result, ILPS actively participates in a variety of whole-of-government, foreign policy and security sector based inter-departmental committees and working groups. Based on the evaluation evidence from key informant interviews and document review, ILPS typically has been sought because of its knowledge, legal expertise and involvement in international development-related matters, and of its experiences, implementing legal technical assistance projects in particular countries and regions of the world. The key informants noted that the needs are even greater now to have input from ILPS with its legal expertise due to events occurring in regions of the world such as in North Africa, Syria and the Middle East where security, migration and human trafficking are major concerns.
ILPS has been requested by senior levels of the Department or other parts of the government familiar with its expertise to conduct legal and policy research and to provide strategic advice. In addition, ILPS has been called upon to provide support for the Deputy Minister of Justice’s participation in the Deputy Minister Committee on Conflict and Fragility, and for Justice’s Senior Assistant Deputy Minister - Policy on the ADM Round Table on Mexico. The depth and range of such contributions can vary considerably depending on the nature of the subjects being considered by these committees. When the committees address international development matters, the analytical work required by ILPS can be substantial. ILPS also receives requests for assistance especially when the relevant ministers of countries of interest visit Canada. In these instances, a request may initially originate as strategic advice and could potentially lead to a legal technical assistance project.
Figure 2 illustrates the time spent researching and providing strategic advice ranging from nearly 1,900 hours to almost 4,600 hours between 2009-10 and 2013-14. This time spent on strategic advisory work accounts for approximately 11% of the total time spent undertaking ILPS functions. Again, there was a marked increase in the number of hours spent in 2011-12 due to the demand on ILPS to provide advisory work during that year. Then there was a drop in the number of hours spent providing strategic advisory work in 2012-13 to just under 1,900 hours but doubled to almost 4,000 hours the following year in 2013-14 compared to the previous year. This rise correlates to the trend that key informants had noted, namely that the demand for strategic advisory work has been increasing.
Figure 2: Total Hours providing Strategic Advisory Work
Text version – Figure 2: Total Hours providing Strategic Advisory Work 2009-2010 to 2013-2014
Line graph showing the total number of hours providing strategic advisory work between 2009-10 and 2013-14.
- In 2009-10, 2198.74 hours
- In 2010-11, a slight increase to 2686.70 hours
- In 2011-12, an increase to 4575.22 hours
- In 2012-13, a decrease 1876.17 hours
- In 2013-14, an increase to 3994.01 hours.
Source: iCase Data
As part of its project design and implementation function, ILPS is called upon by GAC to conduct country specific justice sector needs assessments. The purpose of the assessments is to scope out what viable technical assistance Canada could provide, though they may not automatically lead to the development of projects. During the evaluation period, ILPS contributed 565.42 hours conducting needs assessments on Guatemala and Afghanistan based on the iCase data.
4.1.3. Alignment with Federal Roles and Responsibilities
The Department’s provision of legal technical assistance is consistent with the Government of Canada’s “whole-of-government” approach of promoting Canada’s democratic values in targeted countries and regions around the world, and strengthening the rule of law as a means of supporting social and economic development and security. Under the whole-of-government approach to the pursuit of Canada’s foreign policy objectives, ILPS is the section within the Department that GAC would seek advice from on policy matters relating to justice sector reform. ILPS is often invited and participates in special meetings convened by GAC to discuss Canada’s intervention in conflict areas. Recent high-profile crises that required ILPS’ involvement include Somalia, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria. Therefore, ILPS serves a general advisory and policy-development role on international justice reform assistance in the Department and within the federal government as a centre of both theoretical and practical expertise on international legal technical assistance. The role of ILPS on behalf of the Department is to support the government’s responsibilities in areas that fall within the mandate of the Minister of Justice, with reference to the Department of Justice ActFootnote 8, since the Minister has the general obligation to:
- Provide legal advice to the representative of the head of state and to government departments;
- Ensure the administration of public affairs is in accordance with the law; and
- Superintend all matters connected with the administration of justice in CanadaFootnote 9.
In addition, documentation indicated that the Department can receive and spend Vote 1 appropriation in order to carry out international legal technical assistanceFootnote 10.
4.1.4. Alignment with Strategic Outcomes of the Department of Justice
During the evaluation period of 2009-10 to 2013-14, the activities of ILPS were aligned with the Strategic Outcome of ‘A fair, relevant and accessible Canadian justice system’ by developing and supporting international justice sector reforms to ensure that Canada’s foreign policy objectives are aligned with its criminal law policy in protecting Canadian interests and valuesFootnote 11. This is achieved through the provision of technical assistance to foreign countries seeking to reform their justice systems by promoting foundational Canadian values of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law (e.g., technical assistance initiatives in Jamaica, Mexico and the Palestinian Authority to strengthen their criminal justice systems).
In the last two years of the evaluation period, the activities of ILPS were also aligned with the second strategic outcome of ‘A federal government supported by high quality legal services’. The Section also provides advice in the development of Canada’s international justice policies relating to rule of law reform and justice sector technical assistance especially to GAC.
4.2. Design of the Section
4.2.1. Mandate of ILPS
While the ILPS has the mandate to carry out international legal technical assistance, the evaluation found that it is not well articulated. Key informants suggested that the Section develop a clearly defined vision and mission statement, and to communicate them across the Department and to other relevant federal departments and agencies.
4.2.2. Composition of ILPS
Since 2005, ILPS has consisted of a core group of permanent employees and a flexible group of non-permanent or temporary employees on secondment to the Section from across the Department and/or other federal departments. This flexible structure of staffing personnel enables the Section to have staff with specific expertise to address the particular needs of each funded project.
This “core group and temporary group” approach is meant to retain the necessary staffing flexibility that allows the Section to best match the staffing level with the required expertise of a project, noting that the needs of each project can be very different. The area of legal expertise that would be essential in one project may not be as relevant in another project. This approach creates a flexible capacity to respond to emerging demands and priorities. At the same time, this avoids a large permanent structure that would be inconsistent with service demands and priorities. Accordingly, the size of the Section, in terms of FTEs, varies based on the number of projects in operation at any given time.
At the end of the evaluation period, the Section had consisted of a core group of permanent or indeterminate staff with a total of nine (9) personnel and made up of five (5) Counsel and four (4) Administrative Officers; and a non-permanent or flexible group of six (6) Counsel and a Senior Paralegal.
The evaluation found that the composition of ILPS is appropriate given the nature of its services/activities. The Section was designed to have a solid core group with permanent staff and another group of temporary staff based on the service demands of its technical assistance projects.
4.2.3. Roles and Responsibilities
The evaluation found that there are various types of international legal technical assistance work undertaken within the Department and that there is no central point of coordination for requests of this type of assistance. There are other sections within the Department, which provide - mainly from their existing resources - international legal technical assistance but are generally on an ad hoc basis and focusing on Canadian law. Whereas, ILPS provides - on a cost-recovery basis - legal technical assistance to foreign countries wanting to reform their justice sector. According to the key informants, the technical assistance provided by ILPS is more targeted, funded on a cost-recovery basis, and tied to specific priorities and outcomes.
The document review indicated that the activities provided by the other sections are generally in relation to the justice work done within the Department and can contribute to developing the capacity of the recipient country. For example, the Criminal Law Policy Section delivers specialized seminars and ad hoc training to other countries on topics such as anti-corruption, cyber-crime, organized crime and money laundering. In other instances, the assistance supports the work of the Organization of American States, the Commonwealth Secretariat, or various United Nations working groups assembled to address issues with respect to international law. In contrast, ILPS provides more holistic or comprehensive technical assistance to address country-specific justice sector projects, such as in Mexico, Jamaica and the Palestinian Authority. It was identified in the evaluation that while the Department is carrying out a wide range of international legal technical assistance, there is not a central point of coordination of requests within the Department. Though the evaluation did not identify any specific issues, this fragmentation of international legal technical assistance activities has the potential to result in duplication of work and inconsistencies.
Some key informants suggested that there is not a strong understanding of the role of ILPS within the Department and the nature of their substantive legal work. According to these key informants, one possible solution could be for the Section to promote its roles and responsibilities to relevant areas of the Department. The document review and key informants further noted that the Department has opportunities in the longer term to build synergies with the work being carried out in the Department; to use resources more efficiently; and to develop a higher level of coherency to when and how the Department chooses to engage in legal technical assistance work.
4.2.4. Performance Monitoring and Reporting Capacity
The Section has a systematic process in place within ILPS for collecting, monitoring and reporting on performance results of legal technical assistance projects by using GAC’s accountability reporting system. For monitoring and reporting, the performance results are presented as quarterly, semi-annual and annual reports that are submitted to GAC. Financial reports are submitted every three (3) months to GAC then an advance of funds are provided for the projects. For strategic advisory and outreach activities, there is no systematic and standardized process for monitoring performance and reporting on its outcomes other than recording the time spent working on these activities in iCase.
Knowledge Management
- There is limited accessibility in the storage of project-related information. For example, key informants noted that project matter rather than subject matter is been filed internally, but that it would be beneficial to the Section if the information were also captured by topic or subject matter to further improve the knowledge management within the Section.
- Project Directors have begun to develop comprehensive lists of products finalized from projects. However, it would be useful to the Section if the information was also captured in a systematic manner to be useful for future projects of similar nature.
- The Section has been providing half-day knowledge management learning series several times a year for ILPS staff, and twice a year information-sharing sessions for the Department’s counsel outside of ILPS. These learning sessions have helped integrate and share knowledge across the Policy Sector.
- For strategic advisory and outreach activities, a standardized approach can be developed in iCase such as on the type of strategic advice or outreach activity, to whom it is provided to, the outcome of that activity, and a list of any reference documents.
4.3. Performance – Achievement of Expected Outcomes
According to the Treasury Board’s 2009 Policy on Evaluation, evaluating performance involves assessing effectiveness, as well as efficiency and economy. The subsections below discuss the effectiveness of ILPS – in other words, the extent to which the Section is achieving its expected outcomes.
The purpose of this evaluation is not to assess the individual projects but to identify the extent the Section has achieved its expected outcomes of: i) transferring knowledge of Canadian justice systems principles, structures processes and experiences to recipient countries in order to assist them in strengthening their justice systems; ii) enhancing the capacity of recipient countries to deliver fair and accessible justice.
4.3.1. Project Design and Implementation Function of Legal Technical Assistance Projects
ILPS developed and implemented seven (7) new legal technical assistance projects in five (5) recipient countries namely Palestinian Authority, Ukraine, Turks and Caicos Islands, Mexico and Jamaica during the evaluation period (2009-10 – 2013-14). Of these, five projects have been completed and the remaining two projects have been extended. The types of legal technical assistance projects implemented varied in nature and duration. Many of the projects focused on needs of fragile states or dealing with current, recent or potential crises. These types of projects address institutional capacity, and legal and judicial system foundations by strengthening justice ministries; advising and offering policy support on anti-corruption measures; developing legal resource centres; and strengthening legislative drafting functions. Refer to Table 4 for a summary of the legal technical assistance projects.
The evaluation found that the Section achieved its expected immediate outcome of transferring knowledge of Canadian justice system principles, structures, processes and experiences to recipient countries to assist them in strengthening their justice systems (Appendix A: Logic Model). Across all of the legal technical assistance projects delivered, there was a high level of knowledge transfer. Examples of knowledge transfer across the projects include:
- education and training of judges;
- local experts working alongside the beneficiaries, to emphasize knowledge transfer between the specialist and employee;
- local staff benefitting input from Canadian experts who produced several detailed reports to guide organizational capacity;
- research missions of prosecutors to Canada to participate in various learning exchanges with officials from JUS, PPSC, provincial governments, Royal Canadian Mounted Police, the judiciary, and to observe criminal trials. These exchanges provided a valuable opportunity for knowledge transfer and sharing of best practices;
- delivery of documents such as legislative drafting manuals; and
- observe how case flow management works in Canada.
However, there was limited information available with respect to the achievement of the intermediate outcome of enhancing the capacity of a recipient country to deliver fair and accessible justice. The evaluation found that this was dependent on the length of time a technical assistance project was in operation, the comprehensiveness of a project, and the availability of data, including post-measurement data, collected during and after operation of a project to assess its progress.
In terms of length of time, the evaluation found that long-term commitment of a project is critical to allow an appropriate amount of time to execute it. This is particularly the case when providing technical assistance involving institution building, transforming an organization and changing peoples’ perception. This was the case for both the Palestinian Authority Project, which was initially planned to be a 5-year project but was extended to 7 years; and the Jamaica Project, which was initially planned to be a 4-year project but was recently extended to 8 years.
To demonstrate the benefit of long-term commitment, case disposition rates in the Palestinian Authority Project were improving and indicative of a demonstration of efficiencies in the legal system. Judges had indicated that after 3 years of the project, prosecutors were coming to court more prepared and confident. In year 5 of the project, results of surveys conducted with the judges and lawyers indicated that there was significant increase in the level of prosecutors’ knowledge. In addition, survey results indicated that public perception of integrity and independence of the public prosecution had increased significantly. There was also a significant improvement in the perception of judges, lawyers and non-state actors in the competence and capabilities of prosecution services.
On the other hand, key informants from the Education and Training of Judges component of the Mexico project indicated that their project was short, when compared to the needs of the Mexican government and that more training could have been provided on judicial administration. They thought that it could have had a more sustainable impact if the training was delivered on a national level while switching from an inquisitorial judicial system to an adversarial system.
The evaluation also found that identifying and understanding the needs of the beneficiaries are important to tailoring a technical assistance initiative to their context. This understanding of the needs of the beneficiaries stems from the length of time the project is in operation and interacting with the beneficiaries on a regular basis. Timing and sequencing of project activities are also key factors to successfully execute a project.
The evaluation further noted that projects that only focus on transferring knowledge of Canadian justice system principles, processes, structures and experiences, and in operation for a period of three years or less and not as comprehensive, are less likely to have an impact on the delivery of fair and accessible justice. In addition, the availability of data, such as feedback or survey data during the operation of a project or any post-measurement data, are essential for a project to demonstrate progress and impacts.
The evaluation identified promising practices that aided in the achievement of expected outcomes as well as challenges or lessons learned through the two case studies:
- Palestinian Authority Project of strengthening the organizational, operational and professional capacities of the Office of the Attorney General and the Public Prosecution Services (OAG/PP); and
- Mexico ProjectFootnote 12 of preparing the judicial and legal systems for the transfer from the inquisitorial judicial system to the adversarial judicial systemFootnote 13.
Promising practices
- Having a Field Director and Deputy Director located on-site and in the same building as the beneficiaries of the technical assistance project was useful and critical to the success, legitimacy and credibility of the project. As demonstrated by the Palestinian Authority project, the co-location of the Field Director and Deputy Director within the same office building as the OAG/PP created opportunities for daily interactions with the Attorney General and the Chief Prosecutor. This sustained field presence and the frequent interactions between the project and the beneficiaries resulted in a level of trust and rapport to allow frank conversations when required and improve working relationships. In addition, it allowed for better communication, which enabled the transfer of information and knowledge. According to the key informants interviewed for this project, having a field presence meant additional costs but is important to project outcomes.
- Planning the project in a holistic fashion by ensuring that components of the project complement each other was beneficial to the overall project. The evaluation found that it was especially important to ensure that the infrastructure was in place at the front-end, before providing the training.
- Hiring local specialists who have expertise in an area of focus for the project was beneficial. These specialists worked alongside the local prosecution service employees to increase the capacity of the prosecution service in selected areas of activity. The local specialists were hired to perform a variety of positions including policy analysis, knowledge management, training and professional development, information technology, human resources, gender analysis, communication and outreach, and facilities management. Additionally, service data clerks were hired to archive files and compile data for retrieval of official documents. Another purpose of hiring the highly qualified Palestinian specialists was to have the local prosecution service employees’ work alongside them, therefore, reinforcing knowledge transfer between the specialist and employee. This arrangement proved to be very productive in terms of providing daily interactions between employees and experienced professionals in their field.
- A committee of international donors was established to be aware of the recipients’ evolving needs and to minimize and prevent any overlap or duplication of technical assistance provided, and at the same time improve the efficiency of their respective projects. These implementing agencies included the European Union, the American Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs, United Nations Development Programme and Justice Canada. The Field Director of the Palestinian Authority Project had chaired the committee.
- The Mexico project included technical exchanges or study tours to Canada, and judges training judges to transfer knowledge of the Canadian justice system, principles, structures and processes. These technical exchanges to Canada provided the opportunity to consolidate both theoretical and skills-based learning about the adversarial judicial system and to observe firsthand the skills required for a judge. When the judges visited the Canadian courts, the principles and processes that were discussed became “real” and more understandable. The project reports noted the importance of observing the actual adversarial court proceedings, and that although the exchanges to Canada can be costly it is very valuable since it is difficult to replicate the learning in non-Canadian environments. The participants also had the opportunity to interact and speak with the Canadian judges before and after observing an adversarial court in session. Similarly, key informants noted that it was useful for participants in the Jamaica Project to tour the Canadian courts, interact with the judges, tour the court libraries and observe their services in operation, and to observe how case flow management works.
- The Education and Training of Judges’ component of the Mexico project also had developed a core of judge trainers who had beginners’ proficiency in skills-based judicial education. The pedagogy of skills-based training and judge-to-judge methodologies were used to train judges and, at the same time, train the Mexican judicial trainers to develop courses. These judge trainers were able to develop further courses for their states and region after having gone through the cycle twice. This approach was specifically adapted to the Mexican culture and social realities. This concept was applied as a pilot project whereby over 120 judicial officials were trained in skills development in the five participating states of Tabasco, Chiapas, Quintana Roo, Campeche and Yucatan where the Education and Training of Judges component was taking place. As one judicial key informant indicated, the judges training judges enabled a healthy understanding and better comprehension of the information. The following quotation also reflects the opinion of key informants:
"What is interesting is that the participants themselves developed their own training program according to their own needs, and they will now be responsible for training the next group of educators, which will result in a chain to improve and strengthen the training of operators of the new justice system in our country" stated the Deputy Director of Training of the Technical Secretariat of the Coordinating Council for Implementation of the Reform of the Criminal Justice SystemFootnote 14.
- The flexible manner in which the training and discussions were presented and at the same time not impose the views of the Canadian delivery partners on the participants. Instead, the approach taken was to share the Canadian experts’ knowledge and experience and to guide the participants as appropriate in making their own decisions about how their system will function for them.
- The case studies also demonstrated that partnerships included in the delivery of technical assistance have increased the awareness of the expertise of Canadian delivery partners while supporting knowledge transfer. For example, two Canadian delivery partners, the National Judicial Institute (NJI) and the Office of the Commissioner for Federal Judicial Affairs Canada (FJA) shared in the training of the Mexican judges. Prior to this project in Mexico, both the NJI and FJA, and the Canadian judiciary were not well known. As a result of the Mexico Project, Canada is now recognized for its contribution towards judicial reform.
It was also noted that the partnerships and good relations established during this project had effects beyond the life of the Mexico Project. For example, NJI was approached for the possibility of training judges in Chile. FJA had co-hosted a national conference on Judicial Independence, Ethics and Accountability (June 11-12, 2012 in Mexico City) along with the Superior Court of the Federal District and with the Institute of the Supreme Court of Mexico for Jurisprudential Research and Promotion of Judicial Ethics. The conference proved to be positive for building relationships for possible future interactions. For example, while on a personal visit to Canada a Chief Justice from Mexico approached the FJA to learn more about court administration and the Canadian judicial system.
- The Palestinian Authority Project also had partnerships with local and regional organizations in the field to enhance knowledge transfer. For example, the Faculty of Law of the An-Najah National University in the Palestinian Authority, the Palestinian Judicial Institute, and the Judicial Institute of Jordan, served as sources of knowledge during the life of the project. Their expertise extends beyond the project, along with other organizations including PPSC and JUS.
Challenges/Lessons Learned
The Palestinian Authority Project experienced implementation challenges with contracting local staff. This caused significant delays and affected implementation schedules of the project for almost one year. A solution was found midway during the second year of the project with the UNOPS agreeing to undertake the local procurement and contracting. In so doing, they assumed responsibility for contracting various consultants, specialists, institutions and related materials to assist in the delivery of the legal technical assistance component of the project. In so doing, the UNOPS expanded its involvement in the project beyond its initial procurement of refurbishing the OAG, which was the first phase of the Palestinian Authority Project. The evaluation noted that the lack of clarity on the authority to spend allocated funds relating to the interpretation of guidelines led to the confusion and delays in the early implementation phase of this project. A great deal of effort, assessment of options and re-scoping were required to get the project back on track.
Another challenge that had been identified was the capacity of the recipient institution to participate in the many training activities. Given their regular workload the recipients, in this case the prosecutors, had limited capacity in terms of numbers, time and skills to participate in the many training and technical missions provided. While this issue may have been a result of the compressed timeframe, there was insufficient information available to make a clear determination.
However, despite the few challenges experienced by the Palestinian Authority Project, key informants commented on the successes of the Project and the recognition it has attained. This project has raised the profile of Canada. At the macro level, the project has been very successful in terms of project delivery based on the feedback received from the regular visits to the project site and the discussions with the beneficiaries, the OAG/PP. They appreciated the assistance provided in the early stages of the project especially the refurbishing and professionalizing the institution. The building now has a professional appearance, which in turn has improved the perception of the general public and increased their level of trust. This has been recognized by the police, the courts, and civil society groups (human rights groups and non-governmental organizations) as having a positive effect on the rule of law in the West Bank. From the multiple lines of evidence, it was noted that it is very encouraging to observe this reaction within the first four years of the project. Furthermore, Canada has been recognized for taking a holistic approach for refurbishing the infrastructure of the OAG/PP and then providing the technical assistance. The ILPS designed this holistic intervention and it is seen as a best practice among other donors. In addition, the accomplishment of the Project has increased the visibility of Canada in the justice sector.
4.3.2. Strategic Advice and Outreach Function
In response to an identified need for strategic advice, the mandate of ILPS was broadened to provide this service. Within the Department and across the federal government, ILPS functions as a centre for both theoretical and practical expertise on international legal technical assistance.
Under the whole-of-government approach to the pursuit of Canada’s foreign policy objectives GAC regularly turns to ILPS as the section within the Department to seek advice on policy matters relating to justice reform in a foreign country. In this instance, ILPS is often invited to participate in special meetings convened by GAC to discuss Canada’s intervention in conflict or priority country areas. High profile crises that had required ILPS’s involvement include Afghanistan, Somalia, Libya and Syria. ILPS often participates on a number of interdepartmental committees and working groups led by GAC such as the Stabilization and Reconstruction Task Force Advisory Board.
ILPS also supports the Minister and Deputy Minister on matters relating to international justice and security. This includes providing strategic policy advice relating to international justice sector assistance and capacity building to support the Deputy Minister Committee on Conflict and Fragility, the Commonwealth Law Ministers’ meetings, the Meeting of the Quintet of Attorney Generals, the Organization of American States’ meetings of Ministers of Justice or Attorney Generals of the Americas.
Advice from ILPS has also been sought by other government departments such as Environment Canada for strategic advice on wildlife trafficking. Interviews with other government departments found that they are very satisfied with the strategic advice and the level of involvement of the Section. From the nature of strategic advice provided, it can be determined that it has enhanced the knowledge of the members of inter-departmental committees and other government departments.
To inform its strategic advisory responsibilities, the Section engages in bilateral and trilateral information sharing meetings with counterparts in foreign countries to share experiences on matters relating to the provision of technical assistance to developing countries. The Canada-UK-US Trilateral forum on international justice sector reform was established and meetings occur every 12-18 months. The purpose of the trilateral forums are for both advancing strategic thinking and sharing project information to avoid any duplication of work among the counterparts working in the same country, share best practices and lessons learned, and to stay current on emerging issues. The key informants involved in the trilateral forums indicated that they have found the information and knowledge exchanges to be very helpful in terms of understanding what the allies’ priorities are. These forums have allowed ILPS’ work to remain relevant, coordinated and effective. Furthermore, they support Canada’s capacity to participate strategically in foreign policy and international development justice sector issues.
To further share information and advance innovative thinking, in 1999 ILPS began engaging with CBA, a non-governmental organization, by organizing and coordinating annual CBA conference workshops on international justice sector development. Apart from its purpose of immediate information exchange and knowledge transfer, the workshops are used by ILPS to maintain and expand its network of contacts in the international development community. The information gathered and the relations developed at its annual events enables ILPS to stay attuned to best practices, identify organizations that could participate in delivery of legal technical assistance, and highlight its own achievements. In addition to organizing and coordinating the annual workshops, ILPS is able to inform the workshop agenda to align with the Government of Canada and the Department’s interests, therefore, providing a forum for advancing the Government of Canada foreign policy priorities.
4.4. Performance – Demonstration of Efficiency and Economy
The Treasury Board’s 2009 Policy on Evaluation defines efficiency as the production of “a greater level of output…with the same level of input or, a lower level of input with the same level of output,” and economy as the achievement of expected results using the minimum amount of resources required. Applying these definitions to the work of ILPS, an analysis of efficiency and economy considers the ability of the Section to manage costs while maintaining its activities.
4.4.1. Human Resources
The human resources organizational structure of ILPS consists of a core group of permanent or indeterminate employees and a flexible group of non-permanent or temporary employees on secondment to ILPS. At the time of the evaluation, the group consisted of 16 personnel of which nine permanent positions were staffed with a mix of four administrative staff and five counsel. The Section had an additional seven flexible positions with a mix of counsel and other specializations. Based on the funding and needs of the legal technical assistance projects, ILPS draws on other experts from across the Department and/or departments, or contract experts outside the federal government. The experts come to ILPS on secondment for a specified period of time to work solely on a legal technical assistance project. This organizational structure of core and flexible groups is considered cost-efficient due to the flexibility of the human resources structure responding to the needs of technical assistance projects and to the provision of strategic advisory work. A few interviewees also mentioned that some counsel from the core group are perceived to do more senior level of work, which could be considered an efficiency.
Despite the organizational structure of ILPS being efficient, there were some concerns with respect to internal knowledge transfer. At the end of a project or at the end of a specified period with a project, the temporary employee(s) return to their respective department(s), which can lead to a loss of expertise and knowledge gained during a project. Some key informants thought that the Section does not have a strong knowledge management component, and therefore, minimal internal knowledge transfer occurs.
In terms of the level of effort during the evaluation period, counsel (LA-00, LA-01 and LA-2AFootnote 15) generally spent slightly more time (53%) working on legal technical assistance projects compared to the senior counsel (LA-2B and LA-3A) who tend to focus mainly on strategic advisory work (48%) (Figure 3). It is also economical to have more counsel working on projects and the senior counsel undertaking the strategic advisory work.
Figure 3: Comparisons of Level of Effort by Categories of Counsel spent on Projects and Strategic Advisory Work
Text version – Figure 3: Comparison of Level of Effort by Categories of Counsel spent on Projects and Strategic Advisory Work
Counsel comprise of LA-00, LA-01 and LA-2A.
Senior Counsel comprise of LA-2B and LA-3A.
The level of effort of Counsel tend to work more on the legal technical assistance projects (53%) compared to Senior Counsel (37%).
Whereas, the level of effort of Senior Counsel tend to focus more working on strategic advisory work (48%) as opposed to working on legal technical assistance projects (11%).
The temporary staff of Counsel tend to work more on legal technical assistance projects (36%) compared to doing strategic advisory work (15%).
Source: iCase Data
Despite the usefulness of the iCase data, there were challenges in analyzing this data in terms of the inconsistencies on how information was entered into iCase. This made it difficult to differentiate between legal technical assistance project work and strategic advisory work. For example, a large portion of the Section’s technical assistance project work was entered into more than one category (i.e., corporate, advisory, general, policy) in iCase and which did not distinguish the nature of the service provided. Similarly, the strategic advisory work was entered into more than one category in iCase and was not fully descriptive of the nature of its advisory work. It was also especially difficult to determine with full accuracy what was strategic advisory work.
Although beyond the scope of this evaluation, the Department introduced the National Timekeeping Protocol in April 2015. It is expected that compliance with this new time keeping standard will address some of the issues in iCase identified in the evaluation.
4.4.2. Financial Resources
ILPS underwent a program review in fiscal year 2011-12. Due to the Deficit Reduction Action Plan review in that year, the decision was made that the Section will operate on a full cost-recovery funding model on the basis of funds generated from providing legal technical assistance activities through projects to recipient countries, and therefore funded by GAC. The cost-recovery approach was implemented progressively from fiscal year 2012-13.
Key informants identified challenges using this type of funding model including staff retention, an ability to respond quickly and effectively to requests, and in securing the necessary expertise for the Section.
The evaluation found that GAC requests services from ILPS for legal technical assistance and strategic advisory work as part of a whole-of-government approach on matters of foreign policy and international development. ILPS is fully dependent on GAC approaching the Section with a request to develop and implement a project. Hence, ILPS is tied to GAC’s funding model and key informants pointed out that it is challenging to manage without continuity of funding particularly covering the salaries of the permanent staff. GAC also seeks the assistance of ILPS to conduct justice sector needs assessment in foreign countries to inform GAC’s foreign policy or project development decisions. It was noted that GAC can be reluctant to cover the associated salary and other costs based on the assumption that ILPS has A-Base funding similar to models used in other countries. For example, the US Department of Justice pays the salaries of the United States Department of Justice’s Office of Overseas Prosecutorial Development Assistance and Training (US-OPDAT) (counterparts of ILPS), and other government partners will fund any incremental activity costs. At the United Kingdom’s Crown Prosecution Service (UK-CPS) International Division (another counterpart of ILPS), salaries are funded by other government partners in the same way as the work of the ILPS is funded by GAC. However, in the case of any shortfall, these salaries are absorbed by CPS allowing for a stable base of expertise.
4.4.3. Factors influencing the ability of ILPS to provide its activities efficiently
Despite the efficiencies in the organization structure, the evaluation found that there are factors influencing the Section’s ability to do its activities efficiently. These include the implications of cost recovery, shortage of administrative support, travel constraints, entering into international contracts for the technical assistance projects, and knowledge sharing within ILPS.
Key informants identified that by being on a cost-recovery funding model and dependent on receiving funding to conduct technical assistance projects present challenges for the Section in terms of staff retention, securing corporate memory and capacity building within the Section. The key informants further noted that there is a low incentive for core staff to commit and there are insecure feelings among the staff due to long-term job instability. The cost recovery only covers legal technical assistance project activities and not strategic advisory work or conducting needs assessment of potential projects that may include travel.
GAC regularly requests advice from ILPS on justice sector reform policy matters. Given that ILPS does not receive additional funding for strategic advisory work, it can sometimes pose a resource challenge for the Section to provide timely, high quality advice.
Some key informants perceived there to be a shortage of administrative support within the Section. Consequently, counsel often have to complete administrative work, such as travel arrangements, contracting of experts, and administrative aspects of project reporting, that divert their attention from substantive project-related work.
The evaluation found that there are travel constraints due to the centralization of administrative processes and reduced flexibility. In addition, the increased level of approvals for travel can be time-consuming and reduce work efficiencies. To streamline the approach for approvals key informants suggested exploring the use of blanket approvals, which may expedite project-related travel.
ILPS has had challenges procuring international contracts for renting office space, buying equipment or hiring local staff in the recipient country, which has led to long delays in project implementation. To resolve this issue, GAC identified an effective mechanism of having a third party or external organization procure the necessary international contracts. For example, the UNOPS hired local staff in the recipient country to carry out certain identified activities for the Palestinian Authority Project. However, there is an administrative fee associated with this service that becomes an extra cost to the project, which has strained the relationship between ILPS and GAC, as it reduces the funds supporting project operations.
The final factor influencing the ability of ILPS to provide its activities efficiently was the limited knowledge sharing between ILPS project staff. Suggestions put forward were to share relevant templates and to have regular knowledge sessions for the Section such as on a quarterly basis, and to strengthen the knowledge management capacity.
- Date modified: