WJP Index Report 2012

8/13/2019 WJP Index Report 2012

1/246

e World Justice Project

Rule ofLaw Index

2010

The World Justice Project | Index

Mark D r tJuan Ca l eroJoel Mar zAlejandr nceChristine S. att

2012 - 2013


2/246

e World Justice Project

Rule ofLaw Index

2010

Mark David AgrastJuan Carlos BoteroJoel MartinezAlejandro PonceChristine S. Pratt

With the collaboration of:Kelly Roberts

2012-2013

The World Justice Project | Rule of Law Index


3/246

The World Justice Project

Board of Directors:

Officers:

Executive Director:

Chief Research Officer:

Rule of Law Index 2012-2013Team:

ISBN (print version): 978-0-9882846-2-3 ISBN (online version): 978-0-9882846-3-0

Graphic design:

Suggested citation:

|

TheWJPRuleofLawIndex

II


5/246


6/246

Preface

The rule of law is the foundation for communities of opportunity and equityit is the predicate forthe eradication of poverty, violence, corruption, pandemics, and other threats to civil society.

WILLIAM H. NEUKOM, FOUNDER, PRESIDENT AND CEO OF THE WORLD JUSTICE PROJEC

97countries

covered

More than

97,000people and

2,500experts participatedPREFACE


7/246

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Executive Summary

|



8/246

USES OF THE INDEX

DEFINING THE RULE

OF LAW

I.

II.

III.

IV.

THE WJP RULE OFLAW INDEX

EXECUTIVESUMMARY


9/246

ABOUT THE WORLDJUSTICE PROJECT

Comprehensiveness:

New data:

Rule of law in practice:

Anchored in actual experiences:

Action oriented:

|



10/246

Part I: Constructing theWJP Rule of Law Index |


11/246


12/246

INTRODUCTION

Constructing theWJP Rule of Law Index

DEFINING THE RULEOF LAW

P

ARTI:CONSTRUCTINGTHEWJPRULEOFLAWINDEX|


13/246

Box 1 : The rule of law in everyday life

Suppose the owner o a small business has a dispute with a client over a large, unpaid bill. What i heronly recourse to settle the dispute is through the threat o physical violence? Consider the bridges,roads, or runways we traverse dailyor the offices and buildings in which we live, work, and play. Whatif building codes governing their design and safety were not enforced? Or suppose someone broke intoyour ome an sto e your e ongings, an t ere was no means to rec aim your property an ring t eperpetrator to justice? Although we may not be aware of it, the rule of law is a profoundly importantpart o our lives. It is the oundation or a system o rules to keep us sa e, resolve disputes, and enableus to prosper. Lets consider a few examples:

a. Bus ness env ronmentImagine an investor see ing to commit resources a roa . S e wou pro a y t in twicebefore investing in a country where corruption is rampant, property rights are ill-defined,and contracts are difficult to enforce. Uneven enforcement of regulation, corruption,insecure property rights, and ineffective means to settle disputes undermine legitimatebusiness and drive away both domestic and foreign investment.

b. Public worksSafe and reliable physical structures are essential to a thriving economy and an efficientsociety. Yet corrupt practices in t e construction process a oun , iscouraging onestpractitioners from entering the market through prohibitive bribery and kickback costs. In

many cases, for instance, it has been alleged that government officials and contractors havebeen complicit in using low-quality materials in order to pocket the surplus. Transparency inthe procurement process and effectively enforced regulations and safety codes help curtailillegal practices and increase the reliability and security of physical infrastructure.

c. Pu ic ea tMaintaining the physical health of a society is hugely reliant on its health care deliverysystems. Absenteeism, mismanagement, bribes, and in ormal payments undermine healthcare delivery and waste scarce resources. Un ortunately, it is in poor countries that peopleare most likely to have to pay bribes to obtain medical attention. As a result, many people donot receive a equate me ica care.

d. Env ronmentCountries around the world have laws to protect the environment. Un ortunately, theselaws are not always enforced. Weak enforcement of environmental laws can lead to major

problems, including pollution, de orestation, loss o biodiversity, natural disasters, and poorwaste management. E ective en orcement and appropriate management are use ul toolsin protecting the environment and public health without unduly constraining economicdevelopment. Adherence to the rule o law is essential to hold the government, businesses,civil society organizations, and communities accountable or sound environmental policies.

The rule of law affects all of us in our everyday lives. It is not only important to lawyers and judges;it matters to businessmen, builders, consumers, doctors, and journalists. Every sector o society is astakeholder in the rule o law.

|



14/246

[T]he apartheid government, its o cers andagents were accountable in accordance withthe laws; the laws were clear; publicized, and

stable, and were upheld by law enforcementofficials and judges. What was missing was the

substantive component of the rule of law. Theprocess by which the laws were made was notfair (only whites, a minority of the population,had the vote). And the laws themselves were not

fair. They institutionalized discrimination, vestedbroad discretionary powers in the executive, andailed to protect undamental rights. Without a

substantive content there would be no answer tothe criticism, sometimes voiced, that the rule oflaw is an empty vessel into which any law couldbe poured.

Box 2 : Four Universal Principles of the Rule of Law

The WJP uses a working definition of the rule of law

based on four universal principles: he government and its officials and agents areaccountable under the law.

he laws are clear, publicized, stable and fair, andprotect fundamental rights, including the securityof persons and property.

he process by which the laws are enacted,administered and enforced is accessible, fair andefficient.

Justice is delivered by competent, ethical, andindependent representatives and neutrals who areo su icient number, have adequate resources, and

reflect the makeup of the communities they serve.

P



15/246

THE WJPRULE OF LAW INDEX

Limited Government Powers

Box 3 : Updates to the Conceptual Framework

The WJP Rule of Law Index 2012-2013 report introduces

several conceptual changes. First, several sub-factorsfrom the Index 2011 report have been adjusted in theIndex 1 - 1 report: sub- actor 7.1 (people are awareof available remedies), sub-factor 7.2 (people canaccess and afford legal advice and representation),and sub- actor 7.3 (people can access and a ord civilcourts) rom the In ex 1 report have been merged toorm sub- actor 7.1 (people have access to a ordable

civil justice) of the current report. Second, sub-factor5.1 t e aws are compre ensi e to t e pu ic ansub- actor 5.2 (the laws are publicized and widelyaccessible) have been combined into sub- actor 5.1(the laws are publicized and accessible) of this yearsreport. Similarly, sub- actor 5.5 (o icial dra ts o laws

are available to the public) and sub- actor 5.6 (o icialinformation is available to the public) have been mergedinto sub- actor 5.4 (o icial in ormation is availableon request). Third, or the irst time data has beencollected on sub-factor 2.4 (government officials in thelegislative branch do not use public o ice or privategain). Finally, in the measurement o Factor 2 (Absenceof Corruption), several variables related to the crime ofem ezz ement ave een incorporate into t e In ex.

|



16/246

THE WORLD JUSTICE PROJECT RULE OF LAW INDEXThe rule o law is a system in which the ollowing our universal principles are upheld:

he government and its o icials and agents are accountable under the law.

The laws are r, publicized, stable and air, and protect undamental rights, including the security oclepersons an erty.

The process by which the laws are enacted, administered, and enforced is accessible, efficient, and fair.

Justice is delivered by competent, ethical, and independent representatives and neutrals who are osu icient number, have adequate resources, and re lect the makeup o the communities they serve.

These our universal principles which comprise the WJPs notion o the rule o law are urther developed inthe nine factors of theWJP Rule of Law Index.

Factors & Sub-FactorsFACTOR: Regulatory Enforcement

6.1 Government regulations are e ectively enforced

6.2 Government regulations are applied and en orced without improperinfluence

6.3 Administrative proceedings are conductedwithout unreasonable delay

6.4 Due process is respected in administrative proceedings

6.5 The Government does not expropriate without adequateompensation

FACTOR : Civil Justice7.1 People can access and aff rd civil justice

7.2 Civil justice is free of discrimination7.3 Civil justice is free of corruption7.4 Civil justice is free of improper government influence7.5 Civil justice is not subject to unreasonable delays7.6 Civil justice is e ctively enforced7.7 ADRs are accessible, impartial, and eff ctive

FACTOR : Criminal Justice8.1 Criminal investigation system is effective8.2 Criminal adjudication system is timely and e ective8.3 Correctional system is effective in reducing criminal behavior8.4 Criminal system is impartial8.5 Criminal system is free of corruption8.6 Criminal system is free of improper government influence8.7 Due process of law and rights of the accused

FACTOR: Informal Justice9.1 Informal justice is timely and eff ctive9.2 Informal justice is impartial and free of improper influence9.3 Informal justice respects and protects fundamental rights

FACTOR : Limited Government Powers1.1 Government powers are de ned in the undamental law1.2 Government powers are effectively limited by the legislature1.3 Government powers are effectively limited by the judiciary

1.4 Government powers are effectively limited by independent auditingand review1.5 Government offi ials are sanctioned for misconduct1.6 Government powers are subject to non-governmental checks1.7 Transition of power is subject to the law

FACTOR : Absence of Corruption2.1 Government offi ials in the executive branch do not use public officeor private gain

2.2

Government o ials in the judicial branch do not use public o e or

private gain2.3 Government offi ials in the police and the military do not use publico ce or private gain

2.4 Government o ials in the legislative branch do not use public o cefor private gain

FACTOR : Order and Security3.1 Crime is effectively controlled3.2 Civil conflict is e ectively limited3.3 People do not resort to violence to redress personal grievances

FACTOR: Fundamental Rights4.1 Equal treatment and absence o discrimination4.2 The right to life and security of the person is e ectively guaranteed4.3 Due process of law and rights of the accused4.4 Freedom of opinion and expression is e ectively guaranteed

4.5 Freedom o belie and religion is e ectively guaranteed4.6 Freedom from arbitrary interference with privacy is effectivelyguaranteed4.7 Freedom of assembly and association is e ectively guaranteed4.8 Fundamental labor rights are e ctively guaranteed

FACTOR : Open Government5.1 The laws are publicized and accessible5.2 The laws are stable5.3 Right to petition the government and public participation5.4 O cial in ormation is available on request

P



17/246

Box 4 : The WJP Rule of Law Index methodology in a nutshell

The production of the WJP Rule of Law Index may be summarized in ten steps:

. The WJP developed the conceptual ramework summarized in the Indexs 9 actors and 48sub- actors, in consultation with academics, practitioners, and community leaders romaround the world.

. The Index team developed a set o ive questionnaires based on the Indexs conceptualramework, to be administered to experts and the general public. Questionnaires were

translated into several languages and adapted to reflect commonly used terms andexpress ons.

. The team identified, on average, more than 300 potential local experts per country torespond to the quali ied respondents questionnaires, and engaged the services o leadinglocal polling companies.

. Polling companies conducted pre-test pilot surveys o the general public in consultation withthe Index team, and launched the final survey.

. The team sent the questionnaires to local experts and engaged in continual interaction witht em.

. The Index team collected and mapped the data onto the 48 sub- actors.

. The Index team constructed the final scores using a five-step process:

a. Codified the questionnaire items as numeric values.

b. Produced raw country scores by aggregating the responses rom several individuals(experts or general public).

c. Normalized the raw scores.

d. ggregated the normalized scores into sub- actors and actors using simple averages.e. roduced the final rankings using the normalized scores.

. The data were subject to a series of tests to identify possible biases and errors. For example,the Index team cross-checked all sub- actors against more than 60 third-party sources,including quantitative data and qualitative assessments drawn rom local and internationalorgan zat ons.

. A sensitivity analysis was conducted by the Econometrics and Applied Statistics Unit of theEuropean Commissions Joint Research Centre, in collaboration with the Index team, to assessthe statistical reliability o the results.

.Finally, the data were organized into country reports, tables, and igures to acilitate theirpresentation and interpretation.

|



18/246


19/246

Fundamental Rights

Open government

|



20/246

Regulatory enforcement

Civil Justice

Criminal Justice

P



21/246

Table 1: Countries Indexed in 2012-2013

|



22/246

Informal Justice

Box 5 : Law in practice vs. law on books

In order to evaluate the rule of law in a givencountry, it is important to have an understandingof the countrys laws and institutions. However,

this is not enough. It is necessary to look notonly at the laws as written ( e jure) but at howthey are actually implemented in practice andexperienced by those who are subject to them deacto). The WJPs Rule of Law Index methodologyocuses entirely on adherence to the rule o lawn practice.

MEASURING THE RULEOF LAW

APPROACH

P



23/246

DATA ANDAGGREGATION

USING THE WJP RULEOF LAW INDEX

|



24/246


25/246


26/246

Part II: The Rule of LawAround the World |


27/246


28/246

Regional Highlights

PARTII:THERULEOFLAWA

ROUNDTHEWORLD|


29/246


30/246

AustriaBelgiumCanadaDenmarkFinland

FranceGermanyGreeceItalyNetherlandsNorwayPortugalSpainSwedenUnited Kingdom

United States

COUNTRIES

AVERAGE RANKINGS FOR:

WESTERN EUROPE & NORTH AMERICA

LIMITED GOVERNMENT POWERS

ABSENCE OF CORRUPTION

ORDER AND SECURITY

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

OPEN GOVERNMENT

REGULATORY ENFORCEMENT

CIVIL JUSTICE

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

Western Europe& North AmericaCountries in Western Europe andNorth America tend to outperformmost other countries in all dimensions.These countries are characterized byrelatively low levels of corruption, openand accountable governments, and

effective criminal justice systems. Thegreatest weakness in Western Europeand North America appears to be relatedto the accessibility of the civil justicesystem, especially for marginalizedsegments of the population. This is anarea that requires attention from bothpolicy makers and civil society. Whileprotection of fundamental rights in thisregion is the highest in the world, policediscrimination against foreigners andethnic minorities is an issue of concernin most countries.

Austria ranks among the top 10globally in five dimensions of the ruleof law and among the top 20 in theremaining categories. The governmentis accountable and free of corruption,and fundamental rights are stronglyprotected. Although the country isvery open, people in Austria facemore difficulties in accessing officialdocumentation than do individuals inmost developed nations. The countryscourts are accessible and free of improperinfluence. However, discrimination by

judicial personnel and law enforcement

officers against disadvantaged groups isperceived to be a problem.

Belgium ranks in the top 20 worldwidein seven of the eight dimensionsmeasured by the Index. The countryscores well in government accountability(ranking sixteenth) and protection offundamental rights (eleventh), althoughpolice discrimination against foreigners

is perceived to be a significant problem.The judicial system is relativelyindependent, accessible, and affordable.However, judicial delays in civil cases area source of concern.

Canada performs well in all eightdimensions of the rule of law. Thegovernment is accountable (rankingfifteenth), corruption is minimal (rankingtwelfth) and the country generallyobserves fundamental rights (rankingeighteenth), although discriminationagainst immigrants and the poor isa source of concern. The country isrelatively safe from crime, civil courtsare accessible and independent, and thecriminal justice system is effective inbringing offenders to justice. However,delays in court processes are perceived

to be a problem.Denmark is the world leader in twodimensionsgovernment accountabilityand criminal justiceand places in thetop 10 in all dimensions. Denmarkspublic institutions are transparent,efficient, and free of corruption. The

PARTII:THERULEOFLAWAROUNDTHEWORLD|WESTERNEU

ROPE&NORTHAMERICA


31/246

|



32/246

Box 6 : Equal Access to Justice

As understood by the World Justice Project,access to justice refers to the ability of all peopleto seek and obtain effective remedies throughaccessible, affordable, impartial, efficient,

effective, and culturally competent institutionsof justice. Well-functioning dispute resolutionsystems enable people to protect their rightsagainst in ringement by others, includingpower ul parties and the state.

All around the world, peoples ability to uselegal channels to resolve their disputes is o tenimpeded by obstacles such as inancial barriers,language problems, complexity o procedures,or simply lack of knowledge, disempowerment,and exclusion. This problem is not restrictedto developing countries. In many developednations, the formal civil justice systems, although

independent and ree o improper in luence,remain largely inaccessible to disadvantagedu .

The cases of Finland and the United Statesprovide an illustrative example. When acinga common civil dispute (in this case, an unpaiddebt), most people in Finland, regardless oftheir socio-economic status, tend to use ormaldispute-resolution channels, while only a fewchoose to take no action. The situation is quite

different in the United States. While high-incomeAmericans behave similarly to the Finnish, low-income people act very differentlyonly a fewuse the court system (including small-claims

courts), while many take no action to resolvetheir disputes. The variances between countriesmight be attributable to differences in attorneysees, availability of legal services, awareness o

available remedies, disempowerment, differentinstitutional settings, or differences related tothe organization of the society, to mention justa few. For example, in the United States, amongthe low income litigants, 81% did not seek legalassistance because they felt that they could nota ord the lawyers ees, compared to 48% o thehigh income litigants. In Finland, this differencebetween high and low income litigants is not aspronounced as in the United States. While the

causes of these patterns are subject to debate,ew will disagree with the view that more workis needed to ensure that all people are able tobenefit from a functioning civil justice system.

Figure 2: Use of legal assistance inFinland and in the United States% o respondents who did not use legal assistance because they considered theycould not a ord a lawyers ees

HIH

IN

ME

LOWI

NCOME

UNITED STATES

HIH

N

ME

L

OWI

NCOME

FINLAND

Figure 3: Use of formal dispute mechanismsin Finland and the United States% o respondents who iled a lawsuit in court (including small claims court) toresolve a civil dispute vs. % who took no action to resolve the dispute, grouped byhousehold income level

UNITED STATES

HIGHINCOME

LOW

INCOME

Filed Lawsuit

LOW

INCOME

HIGHINCOME

Took no action

HIGHINCOME

LOWINCOME

HIGHINCOME

LOWINCOME

FINLAND

Filed Lawsuit Took no action

Figure 1: Access to civil justice in highincome countriesScore of factor 7, where 1 signifies higher adherence to the rule of law

N RWAYNETHERLAND

ERMANYIN AP RE

DENMARKWEDEN

EW ZEALANA TRIA

AUSTRALIAANADA

REPUBLI F K REE T NIA

H N K N AR, HINA

BEL IUM

ZE H REP BLIPAIN

P RTU AREE E

L VENIA

LAND

HUN ARYR ATIA

UNITED KIN D M

FRAN E

UNITED TATE


ROPE&NORTHAMERICA


33/246

|



34/246


ROPE&NORTHAMERICA


35/246

COUNTRIES

AustraliaCambodiaChinaHong Kong SAR, ChinaIndonesia

JapanRepublic of KoreaMalaysiaMongoliaNew ZealandPhilippinesSingaporeThailandVietnam

COUNTRIES

AustraliaCambodiaChina


EAST ASIA & PACIFIC

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS



ORDER AND SECURITY

OPEN GOVERNMENT


CIVIL JUSTICE

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

East Asia &PacificThe East Asia and Pacific (EAP) regionis one of the most diverse and complexregions in the world. Taken as a whole,the EAP region falls in the upper half ofthe global rankings in most categories;however, there are important differences

in rule of law outcomes across countriesencompassing the region. Wealthynations, such as Australia, New Zealand,and Japan rank among the top 15 globallyin nearly all categories measured bythe Index, yet lag behind regionalpeers in guaranteeing equal treatmentto disadvantaged groups. In contrast,middle income countries in the regionface challenges in combating corruption,strengthening accountability, andimproving how effectively andefficiently government agencies andcourts function. In countries such as

Malaysia, Vietnam, and China, judicialindependence is an area in need ofattention, as is the poor record onrespect for fundamental rights, includinglabor rights, freedom of assembly, andfreedom of opinion and expression.Accessibility of official information inEast Asia and Pacific countries is lowerthan in other regions of the world.

Australia ranks among the top tenglobally in five of the eight dimensionsmeasured by the Index. The civil courtsare efficient and independent, although

access to affordable legal counsel remainslimited, particularly for disadvantagedgroups. The country ranks among thebest in the world in protecting mostfundamental rights, but lags behindmost other high income countries inguaranteeing equal treatment and non-discrimination, especially for immigrantsand low-income people.

Cambodia is ranked lower than mostother countries in the region on alldimensions. The overall legal andinstitutional environment remains quiteweak, which is highlighted by the lowscores in key areas, including effective

limits on government powers (rankingninetieth); regulatory enforcement;access to civil justice; and absenceof corruption (ranked eighty-fifth).Property rights are very weak, and policeabuses remain a significant problem.On the other hand, Cambodia has lowercrime rates than most countries in thelow income group.

China scores well on public safety,ranking thirty-second overall and fourthamong its income peers. The criminal

justice system is relatively effective, but

compromised by political interferenceand violations of due process of law.Administrative agencies are lax inenforcing regulations and vulnerable toimproper influence (ranking eightieth).The civil court system is relativelyspeedy and accessible, but judicial

|



36/246

PARTII:THER

ULEOFLAWAROUNDTHEWORL

D|EASTASIA&

PACIFIC


37/246

U TH A IA

LATIN AMERI A ARIBBEA

EA TERN E R PE ENTRAL A I

AHARAN AFRI

M IDDLE E A T N R TH AFR I

EA T A IA PA IFI

WE TERN E R PE N RTH AMERI A

Figure 4: Impunity around the worldRegional sub- actor 1.5 scores, where higher marks signi y higher adherence to the rule o law

Box 7 : Impunity

T e princip e t at no one is a ove t e aw isfundamental to the rule of law, which requiresthat all people, including government officialsand agents, be subject to the same legal rules.In countries where the rule of law is strong,government officials are held accountable forofficial misconduct. In countries where the rule ofaw is weak, those who are politically connected

are rarely called to account or their misdeeds.

Impunity means denial o justice or systematicuman rights violations; it prevents corrupt

o icials rom being disciplined; and it underminesublic con idence in the rule o law. The WJP

Rule o Law Index addresses impunity in Factor1 under sub- actor 1.5 Government o icialsare sanctioned or misconduct. The sub- actorapplies to all government o icials, whether theyserve in t e executive ranc , t e egis ative

ranc , t e ju iciary, t e po ice or t e mi itary.

To varying degrees, all countries struggle withthe problem o impunity. Worldwide, only 37%o people surveyed by the WJP in 2012 believe

that a high-ranking government o icer who isexposed for stealing government money wouldbe prosecuted and punished. But the extent othe problem varies substantially by country andregion. In general, Western European and NorthAmerican countries receive the highest scores,followed by East Asia and Pacific, the Middle Eastand North A rica, Sub-Saharan A rica, and EasternEurope and Central Asia. Latin America andSouth Asia are in last place, with 12 of the 16 LatinAmerican countries indexed by the World JusticePro ect in 2012 ran e in t e 30% percenti e orlower.

A culture of impunity undermines respect forundamental rights, breeds corruption, and leads

to a vicious cycle of law-breaking, as it neutralizesthe deterrent effect of punishment. Impunity alsoerodes public trust in state institutions, signalsto citizens that laws do not matter, and acts as a

rag on eve opment. Wit so muc at ris , moreneeds be done in every country to hold officialsaccountable and build a culture that respects therule o law.

|



38/246

Table 2: Rule of law rankings in Brazil, China, India, and Russia (BRIC Economies)

PARTII:THER

ULEOFLAWAROUNDTHEWORL

D|EASTASIA&

PACIFIC


39/246

|



40/246

COUNTRIES



EASTERN EUROPE & CENTRAL ASIA

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

ORDER AND SECURITY



CRIMINAL JUSTICE

CIVIL JUSTICE

OPEN GOVERNMENT

AlbaniaBelarusBosnia and HerzegovinBulgariaCroatia

Czech RepublicEstoniaGeorgiaHungaryKazakhstanKyrgyzstanMacedoniaMoldovaPolandRomania

RussiaSerbiaSloveniaTurkeyUkraineUzbekistan

Eastern Europe& Central AsiaPerformances vary greatly amongstcountries in the Eastern Europe andCentral Asia (ECA) region covered by theIndex, with some nations scoring nearlythe same as the strongest performers inthe world. Accountability remains a major

challenge throughout the region, withmany countries failing to consolidateadequate systems for curtailing abuse ofpower. In addition, regulatory agenciesand courts are often inefficient andsubject to undue influence. The regionsbest scores are in the area of order andsecurity, due to relatively low crime ratesand limited outbreaks of violence.

Albania has significant problems in anumber of rule of law dimensions. Checkson executive power are weak, (rankingseventy-first) and official corruption

is pervasive (ranking eighty-fourth).Rules and regulations are difficult toenforce, and the judiciary is plagued bycorruption and political interference.Police abuses and harsh conditions atcorrectional facilities are also significantproblems. On the other hand, Albaniaranks first among lower middle-incomecountries in protection of freedom ofspeech, religion, and assembly.

Belarusoutperforms most of its income-level and regional peers in several ruleof law dimensions, including order

and security (ranking thirty-thirdglobally), regulatory enforcement(ranking thirty-fifth), and civil andcriminal justice (ranking twenty-sixthand thirty-fourth), respectively. Onthe other hand, the country showssevere deficiencies in governmentaccountability (ranking ninety-first),very weak protection of fundamentalrights (ranking eighty-fourth) and lack

of governmental openness (rankingeighty-seventh). Major problemsinclude lack of independence of the

judiciary and the legislature, severerestrictions on freedom of opinion andexpression, privacy, and association, and

limitations on citizens right to petitionthe government and to access officialinformation.

Bosnia and Herzegovina ranks secondamong upper middle income countriesin delivering effective criminal justice.The country ranks seventh among itsincome group in protecting fundamentalrights and providing order and security.The countrys weakest performance isin the dimension of civil justice (rankingtwentieth among upper middle incomecountries and sixty-fourth overall), mainly

due to severe delays and ineffectiveenforcement mechanisms. Other areasof concern are official corruption,particularly among the executive and thelegislature, lack of effective sanctions forofficial misconduct, and discriminationagainst ethnic minorities.

PARTII:THERULEOFLAW

AROUNDTHEWORLD|EASTERNEUROPE&CENTRALASIA


41/246


42/246

Middle tercile

Bottom tercile

Not indexed

Factor 6: Effective Regulatory Enforcement

Top tercile

Modern societies use public enforcementof government regulations to ensure thatthe public interest is not subordinated tothe private interests of regulated entities.Around the world, regulations vary widelydue to differences in policies, institutionalenvironments, and political choices. Whateverthose choices may be, regulations are futile ithey are not properly enforced by authorities.Ensuring compliance with regulationsis thus a key eature o the rule o law.E ective regulatory en orcement depends,in turn, on accounta i ity, in epen ence,an transparency to ensure t at regu atoryinstitutions act within the limits authorizedby law.

The WJP Rule o Law Index addressesregulatory en orcement in Factor 6. Thisactor assesses the e ectiveness o regulatory

en orcement in practice; the absence oimproper in luence by public o icials orprivate interests; a erence to ue process inadministrative procedures; and the absence ogovernment expropriation o private propertywithout adequate compensation. Rather than

analyzing specific statutes, the Index usessimple scenarios to explore the outcomesassociated with activities that are regulatedin all jurisdictions, such as environmentalstandards, public health, workplaceconditions, and permits and licenses.

Regulatory effectiveness varies greatly acrosscountries (see Figure 5). On a scale between0 and 1, where 1 signi ies higher adherenceto the rule o law, the index o regulatoryen orcement has an average value o 0.72 in

ig -income countries, 0.51 in upper mi eincome countries, 0.45 in ower-mi e incomecountries, and 0.40 in low-income countries.In general, as economies develop, they indmore e ective ways to implement existingregu ations wit in t e imits impose y aw,

ut t is is not a ways t e case. As countriesengage in regulatory re orms, special e ortsshould be made to improve the mechanismsthat are used to guarantee that such laws areimplemented and en orced in an e icient,e ective, and accountable manner.

Box 8 : Regulatory compliance around the world

Figure 5: Regulatory enforcement around the worldountries grouped in terciles according to their actor 6 score

PARTII:THERULEOFLAW



43/246

|



44/246

PARTII:THERULEOFLAW



45/246

|



46/246

EgyptIranJordanLebanonMorocco

TunisiaUnited Arab Emirate

COUNTRIES

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

OPEN GOVERNMENT


MIDDLE EAST & NORTH AFRICA



ORDER AND SECURITY

CIVIL JUSTICE


Middle East &North AfricaThe WJP Rule of Law Index 2012-2013report covers seven countries in theMiddle East and North Africa region:Egypt, Iran, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco,Tunisia, and the United Arab Emirates.Overall, the region receives middling

scores for most factors, although theArab Spring has put several countrieson the road towards establishinggovernments which are more open andaccountable, and functioning systemsof checks and balances. Compared tothe rest of the world, crime is low. Theregions lowest scores are in the area offundamental rights due to restrictionson freedom of religion and free speech,and discrimination against women andminorities.

Egypt is in the process of establishing

a functioning system of checks andbalances (ranked fortieth overall and firstin the region) and an open government(ranking fifty-first overall and second inthe region). Administrative agencies areinefficient, lax in enforcing regulations,and affected by improper influence. Thecivil justice system is slow and subject topolitical pressure. Security is the lowestin the region and people frequentlyresort to violence to resolve grievances.Violations of fundamental rights, mostnotably freedom of religion, privacy,due process, and discrimination against

women and minorities are also areas ofconcern.

Irans system of law enforcement isrelatively strong but is often used asan instrument to perpetrate abuses.The country ranks last in the worldon protection of fundamental rights.Government accountability is weak(ranking eighty-fifth globally and last

within the region), and corruptionpersists. Administrative agenciesare relatively effective in enforcingregulations (ranking forty-first overalland eleventh among upper-middleincome countries), and courts are

accessible and relatively speedy, butsubject to political interference.

Jordanis in the top half of the rankingsamong upper-middle income countriesin most dimensions, with relatively highmarks in the areas of security, civil andcriminal justice, absence of corruption,and effective regulatory enforcement.Property rights are also well protected.Protection of fundamental rights is weak(ranking seventy-fifth), particularly withregard to discrimination and labor rights.

Lebanon ranks first in the region onprotection of fundamental rights (rankedthirty-ninth globally), and has relativelyeffective checks on government power(ranking forty-fourth), including avibrant civil society and a free media.The country ranks poorly on measures

PARTII:THERULEOFL

AWAROUNDTHEWORLD|MIDDL

EEAST&NORTHAFRICA


47/246

Box 9 : Value of Indicators

Indices and indicators are very useful tools. The systematic tracking of infant mortality rates,or instance, has greatly contributed to improving health outcomes around the globe. In a

similar fashion, the WJP Rule of Law Index monitors the health of a countrys institutionalenvironmentsuch as whether government officials are accountable under the law, andwhether legal institutions protect undamental rights and provide ordinary people access tojustice. By producing independent, comprehensive, and policy-oriented rule of law indicatorsworldwide, the Index aims to be a reliable source of impartial data that can be used to measureand assess a nations adherence to the rule of law in practice, and help identify priorities forre orm. In these ways, the Index can be a power ul tool or mobilizing e orts by policymakersand civil society to strengthen the rule o law.

One example of the usefulness of the Index in informing policy debates comes from thework o the WJP in Tunisia. In May 2012, the WJP hosted a small, country-level workshop inTunis, which convened more than two dozen well-placed representatives o Tunisias civilsociety, government, media, and business sectors to come together to assess rule of lawchallenges acing Tunisia and develop recommendations or the countrys ongoing re ormprocess in the a termath o the Tunisian revolution. At the meeting, new polling data romthe WJP Rule of Law Index was used to help identify strengths and weaknesses of the rule olaw in Tunisia. Workshop participants discussed the transition in Tunisia in light o the Indexindings and international examples o constitutional transition processes in A ghanistan,

Spain, Colombia, and South Africa. They developed a set of recommendations and presentedthem to the press and to Tunisian government leaders.

The outcome of this engagement was a document both produced and owned by Tunisians,which discussed the importance of the rule of law to Tunisias historic transition. This projectexempli ies the value o indices and indicators in in orming policy discussions and thetrans ormative power o multidisciplinary collaboration in strengthening the rule o law.

|



48/246

PARTII:THERULEOFL

AWAROUNDTHEWORLD|MIDDL

EEAST&NORTHAFRICA


49/246



ORDER AND SECURITY

OPEN GOVERNMENT


CIVIL JUSTICE


LATIN AMERICA & THE CARIBBEAN

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

COUNTRIES

ArgentinaBoliviaBrazilChileColombia

Dominican RepublicEcuadorEl SalvadorGuatemalaJamaicaMexicoNicaraguaPanamaPeruUruguay

Venezuela

Latin America &the CaribbeanLatin America presents a picture of sharpcontrasts. In spite of recent movementstoward openness and political freedomsthat have positioned many countries atthe forefront of protecting basic rightsand civil liberties, the regions public

institutions remain fragile. Corruptionand a lack of government accountabilityare still prevalent, and the perceptionof impunity remains widespread.Furthermore, public institutions in LatinAmerica are not as efficient as those ofcountries in other regions, and policeforces struggle to provide protectionfrom crime and to punish perpetratorsfor abuses. Crime rates in Latin Americancountries are the highest in the worldand their criminal investigation andadjudication systems rank among theworst.

Argentina faces challenges inmany dimensions of the rule of law.Government accountability is weak,partly because of the poor performanceof government agencies in investigatingallegations of misconduct, as wellas political interference with lawenforcement agencies and the judiciary.Regulatory agencies are perceivedas ineffective (ranking seventy-fifthglobally and fourth to last in the region)and property rights are weak. Anotherarea of concern is the high incidence of

crime. In contrast, Argentina performswell on protection of fundamentalrights, including freedom of religion andfreedom of assembly and association.The court system, although slow andnot fully independent, is relativelyaccessible.

Boliviais one of the weakest performersin the region in many dimensions

of the rule of law. The country faceschallenges in terms of transparency andaccountability of public institutions,reflecting a climate characterized byimpunity, corruption, and politicalinterference. The judicial system is

inefficient and affected by corruption.The country performs poorly in theareas of discrimination and respect forfundamental rights, most notablyfreedom of opinion and expression.Property rights are weak, and policeabuses are a significant problem. Boliviasbest performance is in the area of orderand security, where it ranks sixty-thirdglobally, and fourth among its regionalpeers.

Brazil follows Chile and Uruguay as thethird-best performer in the region and

has the highest marks overall amongthe BRIC economies. The country hasa good system of checks on executivepower (ranked thirty-fifth), although aperceived culture of impunity amonggovernment officials is a source ofconcern. Fundamental rights aregenerally respected, with Brazil ranking

|



50/246


51/246

|



52/246

Figure 6: Burglary rates in Latin America% of people who have experienced a burglary

DOMINI

AN

PUBLIC

BOLI

IA

A

AM

A

NI

ARA

UA

CHIL

COLO

M

IA

U

G

A

ARGEN

INA

JAMAI

A

ELS

ALV

A

O

M

XI

OAZIL

P

U

CADO

VEN

ELA

MI

LIN

ME

UNTR

I

G

ATE

MALA

Figure 7: Conviction rates in Latin Americaof perpetrators of burglaries who are captured, prosecuted, and punished

OMINIC

AN

REPU

LI

MID

LEIN

COMECO

NRIES

PANAMA

NI

ARA

UA

CHILE

C

LM

IA

UUGUA

ARGNTINA

BOLIVIA

LSA

LVA

OR

MEX

IC AZIL

ECUADOR

VNEZU

LA

JA

AIC

A

G

ATE

MALA

Crime rates in Latin America are among thehighest in the world (Figure 6). Although

there are many different contributingfactors, one of the most important relates todeficiencies in the criminal justice system.A well-functioning criminal justice systemserves to in i it crime y provi ing strongdisincentives to potential lawbreakers. Anineffective and corrupt system, on the otherhand, provides little deterrence to criminal

e avior.

With high crime rates prevalent throughoutLatin America, the state o the regionscriminal justice system is a cause forconcern. Criminal investigations in mucho the region are ine ective and criminaladjudications are often unreliable, resultingin low arrest and conviction rates (Figure 7).Systemic corruption among judges and lawenforcement officials (second only to sub-Saharan A rica) adds to the problem. In manycountries, the possibility for offenders to buy

their way out of punishment renders theentire system toothless. Moreover, in many

countries, when perpetrators are caughtand imprisoned, they continue to engagein criminal activity from within the prisonsystem. Sub-factor 8.3 measures whether acountrys correctional system is effective inreducing criminal behavior. Latin Americaranks last overall, and contains seven othe 13 weakest performers.

An ineffective criminal justice systemundermines public confidence and canlead to the adoption o harsh measuresthat violate rights without enhancingpublic safety. Reducing crime rates in LatinAmerica requires, among other things,comprehensive reform of the criminaljustice system that embraces all the actorsin order to build a system that deterscrime and incapacitates offenders whilerespecting human rights.

Box 10 : Crime rates in Latin America

PARTII:THERULEOFLAW

AROUNDTHEWORLD|LATINAM

ERICA&THECARIBBEAN


53/246

|



54/246



ORDER AND SECURITY

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

OPEN GOVERNMENT


CIVIL JUSTICE

AVERAGE RANKING S FOR:

SUBSAHARAN AFRICA

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

BotswanaBurkina FasoCameroonCte dIvoireEthiopia

GhanaKenyaLiberiaMadagascarMalawiNigeriaSenegalSierra LeoneSouth AfricaTanzania

UgandaZambiaZimbabwe

COUNTRIES

Sub-SaharanAfricaWhen examined holistically as a region,Sub-Saharan Africa (AFR) lags behindother regions around the world in nearlyall dimensions of the rule of law. Despiteongoing reforms, many countries lackadequate checks on executive authority,

and government accountability is alsoweak. Many public institutions and courtsthroughout the region are inefficient andvulnerable to undue influence. Crime andvigilante justice also weigh heavily onthe region. Although the regions recordon fundamental rights is mixed, mostcountries do relatively well in protectingthe fundamental freedoms of speech,religion, and assembly. Top performersin the region include Botswana andGhana, which have begun to outperformsome higher income countries in severaldimensions.

Botswanaranks first in the region in alldimensions of the rule of law but one.There is an effective system of checksand balances, including an independent

judiciary and a free press. Corruption isminimal and all branches of governmentoperate effectively. Fundamental rightsare generally respected (ranking fifth inthe region), although limitations onthe right to privacy and discriminationagainst immigrants and ethnic minoritiesare areas of concern. Although the civiland criminal justice systems compare

favorably to other countries in theregion, delays and the poor condition ofcorrectional facilities are areas in needof attention.

Burkina Faso outperforms most of itsregional and income peers in all but onedimension of the rule of law.As comparedto other countries in the region, thecountry scores well in the areas of

regulatory enforcement and civil justice,ranking third and fourth in the region,respectively. The country also performsrelatively well in freedom of speech,assembly, and religion, and protectionof fundamental labor rights. The country

ranks seventy-ninth in governmentaccountability due to the lack of rigorouschecks on the executive and politicalinterference among the differentbranches of government. Although notas pervasive as in other parts of Africa,corruption is commonplace, and crimeand vigilante justice are significantchallenges. The criminal justice systemalso requires attention (ranking sixty-third overall and ninth within theregion), particularly as concerns the lackof due process and harsh conditions incorrectional facilities.

Cameroon lags behind its regional andincome peers in most categories. Thecountry faces challenges in terms ofaccountability and the functioning ofpublic institutions. Checks and balancesare poor (ranking ninety-fourth overall

PARTII:THERU

LEOFLAWAROUNDTHEWORLD

|SUB-SAHARAN

AFRICA


55/246

|



56/246

Box 11 : Fundamental Rights

Upper quartile

Lower quartile

Bottom quartile

Not indexed

Factor 4: Fundamental Rights

Top quartile

Figure 8: Fundamental Rights around the worldCountries groupe in quartiles accor ing to their Factor 4 score.

In 1948, t e Unite Nations Genera Assem yadopted the Universal Declaration o HumanRights. Its Preamble explicitly recognizes thecentrality o undamental rights to the ruleof law, stating that it is essential, if man isnot to e compe e to ave recourse, as aast resort, to re e ion against tyranny an

oppression, that human rights should beprotected by the rule of law.

The WJP Rule o Law Index addresses protectiono undamental rights in Factor 4, measuringhow effectively countries uphold and protecta menu o rights and reedoms that are irmlyesta is e un er internationa aw. T ese

inc u e: t e rig t to equa treatment an t e

absence o discrimination, the right to li e andsecurity o the person, due process o law andrights o the accused, reedom o opinion andexpression, reedom o belie and religion, theabsence of arbitrary interference with privacy,reedom o assembly and association, and the

protection of fundamental labor rights.

Figure 8 illustrates the wide variations fromregion to region in the extent to whichundamental rights are given e ective

protection.

PARTII:THERU


|SUB-SAHARAN

AFRICA


57/246


58/246

PARTII:THERU


|SUB-SAHARAN

AFRICA


59/246

|



60/246

COUNTRIES

BangladeshIndiaNepalPakistanSri Lanka



ORDER AND SECURITY

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS

OPEN GOVERNMENT


CIVIL JUSTICE

AVERAGE RANKING S FOR:

SOUTH ASIA

CRIMINAL JUSTICE

South Asia

Although many countries in the regionhave made efforts to strengthengovernance, South Asia, as a region, isthe weakest performer overall in mostdimensions of the rule of law. Thesecountries are characterized by high levels

of corruption and a lack of governmentaccountability. Administrative agenciesare inefficient and civil courts are slow.Civil conflict and insecurity are majorthreats to stability and progress. Theregion has relatively low crime rates.Criminal justice systems, although notwithout problems, perform slightlybetter than those in other regions of theworld.

Bangladeshscores poorly in governmentaccountability (ranking eighty-thirdglobally and twelfth among low-income

countries), and administrative agenciesand courts are extremely inefficientand corrupt. The country faces seriouschallenges in the dimension of civil

justice, in which it ranks last in the world,mainly because of the lengthy durationof cases and judicial corruption. Humanrights violations and police abuses arealso a significant problem. Bangladeshsbest performance is in the area of orderand security, where it ranks seventy-second globally and ninth among low-income countries. The country has lowercrime rates than many countries with

higher levels of economic development,although mob justice is a persistentproblem.

India has a robust system of checksand balances (ranked thirty-seventhworldwide and second among lowermiddle income countries), an independent

judiciary, strong protections for freedomof speech, and a relatively open

government (ranking fiftieth globallyand fourth among lower-middle incomecountries). Administrative agenciesdo not perform well (ranking seventy-ninth), and the civil court system rankspoorly (ranking seventy-eighth), mainly

because of deficiencies in the areas ofcourt congestion, enforcement, anddelays in processing cases. Corruptionis a significant problem (ranking eighty-third), and police discrimination andabuses are not unusual. Order andsecurity including crime, civil conflict,and political violence is a seriousconcern (ranked second lowest in theworld).

Nepal outperforms its regional peersand most other low income countries inseveral dimensions of the rule of law.The

countrys best scores are in the areas ofcriminal justice (ranking first amonglow income countries and second inthe region), protection of fundamentalrights (ranking third among low incomecountries and second in the region),and absence of crime. Rule of law areasof particular concern in the co u n tr y

PARTII:THERULEOFLAWAROUNDTHEWORLD|SOUTHASIA


61/246

|



62/246

Country Profiles |


63/246

HOW TO READ THECOUNTRY PROFILES

1 Section 1Scores for theRule of Law Factors

2 Section 2Disaggregated Scores

Country Profiles

|

THEWJPR

ULEOFLAWI

NDEX


64/246

Hi hest ossible score 1.00

A sub-factoris representedby a radius from thecenter o the circle to theperiphery

Lowest ossible score 0.00

Purple Line:Featured Country

Green Line:Re ional Peers

Orange Line: IIncome-level Peers

HOW TO READ THE COUNTRY PROFILES

2 Section 2

1 Section 1

COUNTRYPROFILES|


65/246

1. WJP Rule of Law Index

53% Urban19% in threelargest cities

3m (2012)Population

Lower middleIncome

2. Scores for all WJP Rule of Law Index sub-factorsIn each graph, a sub- actor is represented by a radius rom the center o the circle to the periphery. The center o each circle corresponds to the lowest possiblescore for each sub-factor (0.00); the outer edge of the circle marks the highest possible score (1.00).

WJP RULE OF LAW INDEX FACTORS SCOREGLOBAL

RANKINGREGIONALRANKING

INCOME GROUPRANKING

Factor 1: Limited Government Powers

Factor 2: Absence of Corruption

Factor 3: Order and Security Factor 4: Fundamental Rights

Factor 5: Open Government

Factor 6: Regulatory Enforcement

Factor 7: Civil Justice

Factor 8: Criminal Justice

Eastern Europeentra Asia

Region

ALBANIA

Key Lower middle income Eastern Europe & Central AsiaTop Score

Accountable Government

Open Government and RegulatoryEnforcement

Delivery of Justice

Albania

Tirana, Durres, Elbasan

5.1 Laws are publicize

5.2 The laws are stable

5.3 Rightto petitionand publicparticipation

5.4 cialinformation isavailable

6.1 overnmentregulations effectivelyenforced

6.2 Government regulationsapplied without improperin uence

6.3Administrativeproceedingsconductedwithoutunreasonable

elay

6.4Dueprocess indministrative

proceedings

6.5The governmentoes not expropriate

without a equatecompensation

0.0

1.0

0.5

8.4 Criminalsystemis free odiscrimination

7.2 Civil justice is ree oiscrimination

7.3Civil justice is free ocorruption

7.4Civil justice isree o improperovernment

in uence

7.5Civil justiceis not subject tounreasonable delays

7.6 Civil justice isectively en orced

7.7ADRs are accessible,impartial, and e ective

8.1Criminal investigation system is e ctive

8.2Criminal adjudicationsystem is timely an

ective

8.3Correctionalystem is e ctive

8.6 Criminal systemis free of impropergovernmentinfluence

8.5 Criminalystem is free

o corruption

8.7 Due process of law

4.4Freedom of opinion and expression

4.6Arbitraryinterference oprivacy

4.5 Freedom o belie andreligion

4.3 Due process o law

4.2 Right to li eand security othe person

4.1 Equaltreatment anabsence odiscrimination

3.3Peopleo not resort

to violenceto redresspersonalgrievances

3.2Civil conflict isectively limite

3.1 Absence o crime

4.7 Freedom o assemblyand association

4.8Fundamental labor rights

Security and Fundamental Rights

0.0

1.0

0.5

2.1 Absence ofcorruption in theexecutive branch

2.3Absence ocorruption bythe police andthe military

2.2 Absencecorruption

in the judicialbranch

1.7Transition of power subject to the law

1.6Government powersare subject to non-governmental checks

1.5Governmentcials

anctioned ormiscon uct

1.4Independentuditing and

review

1.3 overnment powerslimite by the ju iciary

1.2 Government powers limite by legislature

0.0

1.0

0.5

2.4 Absence ocorruption in thelegislative branch

7.1People have access to affordable civil justice

0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

|

THEWJPR

ULEOFLAWI

NDEX


66/246


67/246


68/246



8m (2012)Population

HighIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING








Nort America

Region

AUSTRIA

Key High income estern Europe & North AmericaTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Austria

Vienna, Graz, Linz








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

COUNTRYPROFILES|AUSTRIA


69/246



161m (2012)Population

LowIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING








South Asia

Region

BANGLADESH

Key ow income outh AsiaTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Bangladesh

Dhaka, Chittagong, Khulna








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

|

THEWJPR

ULEOFLAWI

NDEX


70/246



9m (2012)Population

pper middleIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING









Region

BELARUS

Key Upper middle income Eastern Europe & Central AsiaTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Belarus

Minsk, Gomel, Mogilev








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

COUNTRYPROFILES|BELARUS


71/246




HighIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING








Nort America

Region

BELGIUM

Key High income estern Europe & North AmericaTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Belgium

Brussels, Antwerp, Gent








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

|

THEWJPR

ULEOFLAWI

NDEX


72/246




Lower middleIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING








Latin Americaari ean

Region

BOLIVIA

Key Lower middle income Latin America & CaribbeanTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Bolivia

La Paz, Santa Cruz, Cochabamba








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

COUNT

RYPROFILES|BOLIVIA


73/246



4m (2012)Population

pper middleIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING









Region

BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

Key Upper middle income Eastern Europe & Central AsiaTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Bosnia and Herzegovina

Sarajevo, Banja Luka, Tuzla








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

|

THEWJPR

ULEOFLAWI

NDEX


74/246



2m (2012)Population

pper middleIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING








Sub-SaharanAfrica

Region

BOTSWANA

Key Upper middle income ub-Saharan AfricaTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Botswana

Gaborone, Francistown, Molepolole








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

1.0

0.5







1.5Governmentcials



review



0.0

1.0

0.5



0.5

1.0

0.0

0.5

COUNTRY

PROFILES|BOTSWANA


75/246




pper middleIncome




INCOME GROUPRANKING








Latin Americaari ean

Region

BRAZIL

Key Upper middle income Latin America & CaribbeanTop Score



Delivery of Justice

Brazil

So Paulo, Rio de Janeiro, Belo Horizonte








elay


proceedings



0.0

1.0

0.5





in uence






ective




o corruption











3.1 Absence o crime




0.0

WJP Index Report 2012

Documents

Transcript of WJP Index Report 2012