For fiscal years 1992 through 2000, the United States has obligated at least $216 million in assistance to help establish the rule of law in the new independent states of the former Soviet Union. However, U.S. efforts we reviewed to help retool the judiciary have had limited impact so far. Limits on Impact and Sustainability Stem From Political, Economic, and Program Management Issues

Three factors have constrained the impact and sustainability of U.S. rule of law assistance: (1) a limited political consensus on the need to reform law and institutions, (2) a shortage of domestic resources to finance many of the reforms on a large scale, and (3) a number of shortcomings in U.S. program management. Conclusions

The U.S. government’s rule of law assistance program is a key element of the U.S. foreign policy objectives of fostering democratic and open market systems in the new independent states of the former Soviet Union. After nearly a decade of effort and more than $200 million worth of assistance, the program has had difficulty fostering the sustainable institutions and traditions necessary to establish the rule of law in this region.
Why GAO Did This Study

For fiscal years 1992 through 2000, the U.S. government provided assistance to help the 12 newly independent states of the former Soviet Union develop the sustainable institutions, traditions, and legal foundations that ensure a strong rule of law. This report (1) assesses the extent to which the program has had an impact on the development of the rule of law and whether the program results are sustainable and (2) analyzes the factors that may have affected the program's impact and sustainability.

What GAO Found

GAO found that the U.S. government's rule of law assistance program has had limited impact so far, and results may not be sustainable in many cases. The impact and sustainability of the U.S. rule of law assistance programs have been constrained by several factors, including limited political consensus on reforms, a shortage of domestic resources for many of the more expensive innovations, and weaknesses in the design and management of assistance programs by U.S. agencies.