|
Assistance can be provided or sought in the following matters：
(1)Executing requests relating to criminal matters；
(2)Taking of testimony or statements of persons；
(3)Effecting the production，preservation and authentication of documents, records or articles of evidence；
(4)Effecting the appearance of a witness，or expert before a court of the requesting state；
(5)Locating persons；
(6)Serving and／or providing judicial records，documents，evidence and information.
However，assistance can be refused if：
(1)It is against public or private rights and guarantees；
(2)It is prejudicial to the interests of the state；
(3)If the offence upon which assistance is sought is a political or military offence．
Japan
Japan also has legislation for international assistance in investigation and on judicial assistance to foreign courts．Requests are made by diplomatic channel through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs．
Matters for assistance under the law include：
(1)Interrogation of persons relevant to a case；
(2)Requiring an expert to make inquiry or non-compulsory inspections of a matter under dispute；
(3)Requiring owners／possessors of documents or other materials to submit those；
(4)Execution of requests for seizure and search；
(5)Application to a judge for examination of a witness；
(6)Requiring public offices or private organizations to make reports on necessary matters．
Assistance to a foreign state can be refused in the following circumstances：
(1)If the request for assistance is a political offence；
(2)If the offence upon which request is made is not an offence under the laws of Japan(dual criminality)；
(3)If the requesting state has not given assurance that it will honour a request of the same kind if made by Japan；
(4)If the requesting state does not indicate in writing that the evidence sought is indispensable for the investigation．
Korea also has a mutual assistance treaty with Australia．It has also treaties with USA and Canada which have not yet come into force．
After discussing in detail various legislations regarding legal mutual assistance by various countries，the group expressed some problems which may or have already arisen on matters such as obtaining evidence or testimony from one country for use in trial by a court of another country．
The group unanimously agreed that the difference in legal systems with different standards of proof and rules of admissibility, evidence taken in a foreign country may not necessarily be admissible in another country．A member from Japan for example pointed out that written statements provided by commissioned foreign investigation are regarded in Japan as hearsay and cannot be admissible if the exceptions provided under the law are not fulfilled．An example of this conflict of laws is that a testimony of a witness taken in Japan and given to the United States judicial authorities cannot be admissible in the US. courts unless the witness is cross-examined．But under Japanese law，a defendant or accused and his defense counsel from USA． cannot be allowed to cross examine a witness in Japan．
As a solution to this problem，the group recommended that both requesting and requested states should consult each other promptly at the request of either，concerning any point of law in relation to a case upon which request is made．
Alternatively the group noted with concern one decision of the Italian Supreme Court which confirmed a principle that may now be considered well established in Italy that：
“Evidence taken abroad is valid and admissible in criminal proceedings carried out in Italy when such evidence has been lawfully taken in accordance with the laws of the foreign state that supplied the assistance and is not in conflict with the Italian order public．”
But again what constitutes “order public” is something which requires further discussion and is open for debate；because as one scholar commented，“the taking of evidence without the rights of defense will be contrary to the Italian ‘order public’”.
Another anticipated problem voiced by members of the group is the unlikelihood of success in obtaining evidence from bank records in offences like money laundering because of the domestic laws governing bank secrecy.
Some members pointed out the existence of domestic laws in their countries whereby courts may issue a monitoring order directing financial institutions to give information relevant to an investigation about financial transactions conducted through an account held by a particular person．
This was accepted by the group and it was recommended further that states should react positively by revising laws which shield illicit proceeds of dangerous criminal groups．
(a)Mutual assistance through letters rogatory
This is another kind of international assistance whereby courts or legal institutions of different countries exchange assistance in civil and criminal matters through letters rogatory．The exchange is done on a reciprocal basis．This assistance is sometimes called “Judicial Assistance．”
Letters rogatory are the most common means used by some countries like USA to request or render mutual assistance in the investigation and prosecution of transnational crimes．
Procedurally，letters rogatory requests are made by a court or tribunal in the requesting country to a court or tribunal in the requested country which executes the requests by utilizing its own process of execution．
Execution of the request is done as a matter of comity and is within the discretion of the requested court or tribunal depending on the attitude of the courts of the two countries towards each other，the diplomatic relations between the two countries and the character of the proceedings which underlie the request．
|
