CRIMINAL JUSTICE SECTOR ASSESSMENT RATING TOOL Version 2.0 | Page 26

• • • • • • Is the public defender’s office adequately funded and adequately/professionally staffed? Does each public defender have a reasonable case load (to allow counsel to effectively prepare cases)? Do low-income persons and indigents have reasonable assurance of access to public defenders? Are indigent defendants represented in the course of the process from arraignment through the appeals hearing, not just at trial? Are private pro bono defenders available? Are minimal, waived or no court fees available for low-income defendants? 6) Function: Trier of Fact8 a) Capability: Independence i) Measurement Indicators • Is the Trier of Fact independent from prosecutors/defense? • Does the Trier of Fact have a secure and private location where they can deliberate? • Are the Trier of Fact member(s) generally protected from outside illegal influences, pressures, and intimidation as well as political manipulations? 7) Function: Ethical Standards a) Capability: Ethical Standards i) Measurement Indicators Do ethical codes exist and are provisions/guides generally • available for all legal professionals? • Are ethical codes generally accepted and followed? • When the Ethical Code is violated, is it enforced and are violators held accountable? • Is the ethical code applied to everyone in the legal profession (including judges, prosecutors, legal defenders, etc.)? b) Capability: Anticorruption Measurement Indicators i) • Are anticorruption laws widely promulgated? Are anticorruption laws generally accepted and considered the • standard for the profession? • Is Anticorruption ethical guidance accompanied by regular and mandatory training? • Can offenders also be prosecuted for the support/acquiescence of corruption, including money-laundering and obstructing justice 8 Trier of Fact may be a lay jury, panel of judges or the bench itself, but the primary consideration is whether the Trier of Fact can and does operate independently and without influence to its deliberations. 26