Abstract
As interest in juries grew, the views of those who opposed their return crystallised more, leading to a debate between jury supporters and opponents. This chapter outlines some arguments made by those against, or who were sceptical about, jury restoration and presents the counter-arguments made by those in favour.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
Later research by Hiroshi Fukurai , who systematically studied citizen participation on Prosecutorial Commissions, also found citizens very positive about their service, were willing to serve again and expressed high levels of confidence in judges and other legal actors. See Hiroshi Fukurai, “The Re-birth of Japan’s Petit Lay Judge and Grand Jury Systems: A Cross-National Analysis of Legal Consciousness and the Lay Participatory Experience in Japan and the U.S.”, 40 CORNELL INT’L L. J. 315, 323–28 (2007).
As a means of controlling their very wide discretion, prosecutors’ decisions not to prosecute may be reviewed by Prosecution Review Commissions (PRC) on the request of the alleged victims of crimes or interested parties or on their own initiative. About 200 Commissions exist around the country, each composed of eleven citizens who serve for one year, selected at random from the electoral roll. PRC powers include summoning the persons who have initiated the proceedings and others involved in the case, and compelling prosecutors to attend, explain their conduct and produce relevant material. Members of the Committee may agree that an alleged defendant should be prosecuted. However until 2009, when a revision of the Code of Criminal Procedure in 2004, recommended by the Judicial Reform Council 2001, became effective, their decisions were only advisory and prosecutors frequently did not follow them. Commissions may now ultimately order prosecutions be initiated.
- 2.
See Mariko Akuzawa, “Whither Institutionalized Human Rights Education? Review of the Japanese Experience”, in Hurights Osaka. Ed. Human Rights Education in Asian Schools, Volume X; pp. 175–184, Bunseido Publishing, 2011.
- 3.
A report published by the JFBA in 2000 showed 39 court jurisdictions out of 253 nationwide had no practising lawyers, while a further 34 had only one (Japan Times, 9 May 2000).
References
Auld, R. (2001). Review of the courts of England and Wales. Rt. Honourable Lord Justice Auld. Stationery Office.
Dale, P. N. (1986). The myth of Japanese uniqueness. London: Nissan Institute for Japanese Studies, University of Oxford.
De Wolf, C. (2001, 11 February). Asahi Shimbun.
Doi, T. (1973). The anatomy of dependence. Tokyo: Kodansha International.
Economist. (2002, 20 April). A survey of Japan.
Foote, D. (1992a). From Japan’s death row to freedom. Pacific Rim Law and Policy Journal, 1(1), 10–103.
Foote, D. (1992b). The benevolent paternalism of Japanese criminal justice. California Law Review, 80(1), 317–389.
Hirano, R. (1957). ShokugyoSaibankan to ShiratoSaibankan (Professional Judges and Lay Juries). HoritsuJiho, 29, 435–437.
Hirano, R. (1989). Diagnosis of the current code of criminal procedure. Law in Japan: An Annual, 22, 129.
Ishimatsu, T. (1990). Are criminal defendants in Japan truly receiving trials by judges? Hogaku Seminar No. 423, pp. 62–68.
Johnson, D. (2002). The Japanese way of justice: Prosecuting crime in Japan. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
JRC. (2001). Recommendations of the Justice System Reform Council for a justice system to support Japan in the 21st century. Tokyo: Government of Japan.
Kasai, Y. (2000, 17 July). Professor Yasunori Kasai, Faculty of Law, NiigataUniversity. Interviewed in London.
Kiss, L. (1999). Reviving the criminal jury in Japan. Law and Contemporary Problems, 62(2), 261–283.
Kitaguchi, S. (1999). An introduction to the Buraku issue. Richmond, Surrey: Japan Library.
Kojima, T. (2000, 22 September). Professor Takeshi Kojima, Head of the Japan Institute for Comparative Law, ChuoUniversity, Tokyo, interviewed in London.
Koyima, N. (1999). A cultural study of the low crime rate in Japan. British Journal of Criminology, 39, 369.
Kurasawa, K. (1999, 21 December). Interviewed by the Japan Times.
Lie, J. (2001). Multi-ethnic Japan. Cambridge, MA: HarvardUniversity Press.
Maruta, T. (1999, 21 December). Interviewed by the Japan Times.
Maruta, T. (2001). The Criminal Jury System in Imperial Japan and the Contemporary Argument for its Reintroduction. 72 IN’L REV.PENAL L.216 (2001).
Miller, N., & Cambell, D. (1959). Recency and primacy in persuasion as a function of timing of speeches and measurements. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 59, 1–9.
Moriyama, T. (1995). The structure of social control in Japan. In R. Jakob (Ed.), Psyche, Recht, Gesellschaft (pp. 47–66). Bern: Verlag Stampfli.
Noda, Y. (1976). Introduction to Japanese law (pp. 159–160). Tokyo: Tokyo University Press.
Schreiber, M. (2002, 20 January). Kakukichi: Where worlds collide. Japan Times.
Shiibashi, K. (1999, March). Aspects of the British system of trial by jury and the issue of the re-introduction of jury trial for criminal offences in Japan. HogakuranshuYamanashigakuinUniversity Law Review.
Stephens, S., & Mishler, E. (1952). The distribution of participation in small groups: An exponential approximation. American Sociology Review, 17, 598.
Sugimoto, Y. (1997). An introduction to Japanese society. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Toyokawa, M. (1993). Masaaki Toyokawa, President of SaibanShimin No Kai (Citizens Court Watchdog Society), interviewed on 27th November 1993 at the inauguration of the Niigata branch of SaibanShimin No Kai.
US Department of State. (2000). US Department of State country reports on human rights practices—Japan. Washington, DC: US Department of State.
Wagatsuma, M. (2001). Professor Manabu Wagatsuma, Faculty of Law, Tokyo Metropolitan University, interviewed on 17th July 2001 in London.
Watson A. in Marutscke H, Laienrichter in Japan,Deutschland und Europa, BWV Berliner Wissenschafts-verlag, 2005, 146
Yamazaki. (1993). Cited by Watson A. in Laienrichter in Japan, Deutschland und Europa . BW. Berliner Wissenschafts-Verlag 2005, 146.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Watson, A. (2016). The Debate About Juries. In: Popular Participation in Japanese Criminal Justice. Palgrave Advances in Criminology and Criminal Justice in Asia. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-35077-6_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-35077-6_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-35076-9
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-35077-6
eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)