21. Frontier Justice: A New Approach for U.S. Rule of Law Assistance
- Author:
- Robert M. Perito and Donald J. Planty
- Publication Date:
- 05-2018
- Content Type:
- Commentary and Analysis
- Institution:
- Public International Law Policy Group
- Abstract:
- United States rule of law assistance is failing to help recipient governments provide good governance, security and justice. This is particularly true in three categories of states in crisis: (1) states that are experiencing extreme levels of organized criminal violence; (2) states where international Islamist terrorism is attempting to impose extreme versions of Shariah law; and (3) states where corrupt authoritarian governments have morphed into kleptocracies. Though conditions have changed in these countries, U.S. rule of law assistance continues to employ a fragmented and technocratic approach to improving foreign criminal justice systems. Dedicated officials, civil society leaders, and concerned citizens in these countries want to establish the rule of law. In many cases, our current assistance does not help them change the prevailing paradigm. What new approaches for U.S. rule of law assistance are required to provide them with the support needed to change the system? In countries threatened by criminal violence, terrorism, and corrupt authoritarian rule, the study found that those working to promote a democratic political process believed rule of law was the essential element in providing good governance, security, and justice. They pointed out that law enforcement authorities and the criminal justice system were primary targets for those seeking to impose despotic regimes. They looked to the United States as a natural ally sharing common values and providing a model of what they can achieve. These individuals confirmed the critical importance of U.S. assistance in preventing further deterioration in the local conditions and to providing any hope that the situation might be improved. In all cases, these activists lamented the fact that U.S. rule of law assistance programs were often not strategically focused, culturally relevant, or adequately resourced. They made clear that more—not less—U.S. help is required to move forward. Indeed, they called for increased use of U.S. political and diplomatic leverage, closer consultations on program selection and development, and more intelligent targeting of financial resources. Whether aimed at establishing justice, enabling economic development, or promoting foreign investment, U.S. rule of law assistance has been a tool of U.S. foreign and national security policy since the end of World War II. The Obama Administration, however, subordinated rule of law programming to assistance for promoting democracy, protecting human rights, and enabling good governance. There also was a sharp drop in the financial resources devoted to aiding the justice sector. Outside of large programs in Iraq and Afghanistan, funding for aid to courts and corrections fell from several billion dollars to $1.9 billion in 2013 to less than $500 million in 2016. At the same time, rule of law assistance became ‘securitized’ with assistance increasingly focused on convicting and incarcerating drug traffickers and terrorists. The study identified other conditions and practices that undermined the effectiveness of U.S. rule of law programming. From the Washington perspective there is no readily knowable number for the total amount the United States spends annually on rule of law assistance, nor is there a common policy, doctrine, strategy, or coordinating mechanism for this aid. Funding is provided from a number of legislative funding sources, allocated to various government departments, and then spread among numerous implementing partners, primarily non- governmental organizations (NGOs) and commercial contractors. Assistance programs militarize civilian security forces and train prosecutors to charge terrorism suspects and jailors to prevent radicalization. Government agencies concerned with the rule of law programming utilize staff with legal and law enforcement backgrounds largely as advisors and rely upon generic program officers to handle program design, funding and program management. As a result, establishing the rule of law is less a tool than an end state that hopefully will result from programs to ensure free elections, fight drug trafficking, and counter violent extremism. In the field, the study found the administration of U.S. rule of law assistance is neither strategically focused nor designed to produce sustainable change. U.S. programs fail to emphasize that state building efforts are political initiatives and not technical exercises. Program funding is not concentrated to achieve objectives and mobilize sufficient local support. In areas where criminals, jihadists, and insurgents operate without respect for national borders, U.S. assistance does not have a regional perspective. Project implementation is also affected by a lack of U.S. government staff with legal and law enforcement backgrounds on the ground and by risk adverse State Department personnel policies that restrict the movement of U.S. officials making it difficult for them to meet with counterparts and visit project sites to access progress.
- Topic:
- Security, Governance, Legal Theory, Rule of Law, Borders, and Legal Sector
- Political Geography:
- North America and United States of America