The document summarizes the results of a survey on access to justice in Lao PDR. The survey had several objectives: to inform development of the Legal Sector Master Plan, build on successes to enhance access to justice, assist in prioritizing issues and target groups, and identify best methods for legal awareness activities. Key findings included that lack of legal awareness is a major obstacle, particularly for formal mechanisms; people find legal awareness activities useful but prefer official sources; and legal aid is less common outside Vientiane. The survey results can help meet the Legal Sector Master Plan goal of establishing an efficient, effective, equitable and accessible justice system.
1 of 8
Download to read offline
More Related Content
A2 j survey workshop for launching 29 feb 2012
1. Survey on The People’s Perspective on
Access to Justice In Provinces in Lao
PDR
2. Specific Survey Objectives:
ï‚—
ï‚— To inform the development of concrete actions for the Legal Sector
Master Plan;
ï‚—
ï‚— To build upon ongoing initiatives and successes to enhance
access to justice across the country;
ï‚—
ï‚— To assist in the prioritization of issues, locations and target groups
for legal awareness activities and legal aid assistance;
ï‚—
ï‚— To identify the best methods for conducting legal awareness
activities;
ï‚—
ï‚— To identify additional strategies, entry points and to propose
3. Public Access to, or Interaction with, Justice
Systems
ï‚—
;
ï‚— Lack of legal awareness is the main obstacle to people accessing the system;
particularly formal mechanisms;
ï‚—
;
ï‚— A significant proportion of people have participated in legal awareness-raising
activities and uniformly found it useful;
ï‚—
ï‚— People like participatory legal awareness activities or user-friendly media.
However, they seem to prefer the source of the information to be official,
albeit tailored to the local context
ï‚—
ï‚— Legal aid or assistance provision still seems to be relatively uncommon;
particularly outside of Vientiane
ï‚—
4. Public Confidence or Perception
ï‚—
ï‚— People rely on local officials for accurate information about their rights and
remedies.
ï‚— - -
ï‚— Customary mechanisms are most trusted, and most used, by the public - especially
women - to resolve disputes.
ï‚—
 Semi-formal or formal remedies, however, are preferred to resolve ‘external’ or
‘arm’s length’ disputes.
ï‚—
ï‚— The process and treatment of participants is almost as important as the outcome in
instilling confidence in any - informal, semi-formal or formal - justice system.
ï‚—
ï‚— Public perception of the value-added by lawyers is low, but higher for free services,
5. Legal Awareness Priority Issues, Locations, and Target
Groups
ï‚—
 Demand for training on ‘all relevant laws’: especially, ‘justice-related issues’,
family law, and ‘rights’.
ï‚—
-
ï‚— Theft, drunkenness, unfair or unequal treatment, inequitable distribution of
development assistance, drug abuse, domestic or other gender-based
violence, adultery, trafficking, fights, and land disputes – arise frequently, so
should also be a focus.
ï‚—
ï‚— Targeted (regionally) training: e.g., human trafficking.
ï‚—
ï‚— Enhanced awareness-raising in remote areas, far from courts.
6. A2J and the LSMP
/ LSMP Goal:
To develop a coherent, credible and predictable legal framework established in a
transparent and participatory manner, while at the same time building efficient,
effective, equitable and accessible justice and law enforcement institutions and
systems.
/ Links to LSMP:
ï‚—
= I,
ï‚— A2J Rights Framework = Pillar I, Legislative Development
ï‚— = IV,
ï‚— Knowledge/Awareness = Pillar IV, Dissemination
ï‚— = II,
ï‚— Access/Interaction = Pillar II, Institutions
ï‚— = III,
II)
7. Additional Strategies, Entry Points, and Recommendations
ï‚—
ï‚— Setting up of public information centres in the courts, to make them more
approachable and user-friendly; particularly to the poor and vulnerable.
ï‚—
ï‚— Investigation of possible establishment of mobile or circuit courts at the district level.
ï‚—
ï‚— Improvement of physical access to the courts, especially for the disabled.
ï‚—
ï‚— A clarified and more balanced relationship between the prosecution and judges,
as well as with lawyers.
ï‚—
ï‚— A more regularised and transparent relationship between informal, semi-formal, and
formal justice systems.
ï‚—
ï‚— Training of paralegals at the village or, at least, district levels.
ï‚—
ï‚— Harmonisation/integration of the system of petitions with administrative and judicial