Close

Support Global Voices

To stay independent, free, and sustainable, our community needs the help of friends and readers like you.

Donate now »

Japan: The curtain rises on the lay judge system

May 21st marked the first day in the introduction of the lay judge system in Japan, saiban'in seido (裁判員制度) in Japanese. The first trials in which the new system is to be applied will start in July and six citizens will be called upon to examine and judge criminal cases together with three professional district court judges.

(Former) Nagoya District Court. By Taro416.

(Former) Nagoya District Court. By Taro416.

The system is said to represent a step forward in the Japanese administration of justice and with it the country will be on the same level as the other G8 countries.

However, despite numerous attempts by the Ministry of Justice to make the people familiar with the system (through free videos available in the video rental shops or through cartoons like this [jp]), the majority of Japanese citizens seem to be perplexed and quite apprehensive about the consequences that being a judge may bring, as a recent survey by CNET Japan [ja] has reported.

The survey shows that 65.1% of the respondents (361 people in their 30s and 40s) declared themselves against the participation of common citizens in the judging process. Multiple reasons were given but the main ones were ‘I don't like judging others’ (52.8%), ‘I don't want to have trouble’ (44.3%) and ‘I have no confidence in my judgment’ (43.8%).

In this regard, the blogger Usagiinu explains the reasons for his disagreement.

裁判員制度の恐ろしいところは、秘密は絶対に口外してはならない点にあります。裁判員には一日一万円の手当を支給するから…というのは卑劣なやり方でしょう。
逆に言えば、検察官や弁護士、裁判官は秘密をブログに書くことはできても、裁判員は裁判が終わっても死ぬまで…いや、死んでも裁判の秘密を口外してはならないのである。

The scary part of the lay-judge system is the absolute confidentiality that must be observed. For this, lay judges will get a 10.000 Yen [about $100] allowance… but isn't this rather mean?
While police officers, lawyers and judges can write details in their blogs, lay judges, even when the trial is over, may not until their death…or even after, reveal secret details of a trial.

Further in the post, Usagiinu stresses two of the most worrying issues relevant to the introduction of the saiban'in seido. The influence of media and, consequently,the necessary changes which must occur in reporting of trials.

裁判員制度と直接は関係ないが、新型インフルエンザに関しても、観光客が関西地方を敬遠したり しています。正しい知識がないために、多くの日本人はテレビや週刊誌の報道を鵜呑みにしているため、このような事が起きている。
自白のみを証拠として採用する日本の刑事裁判に公正な裁判なんて期待なんてできない。アメリカの陪審員制度を真似たとも言われますが、実際はそんなものではないでしょう。日本は即刻、裁判員制度をやめるべきだと思います。

Perhaps it has no direct correlation with the lay judge system but in the Kansai region recently many tourists were persuaded to stay away because of exaggerated reporting of the recent swine influenza epidemic. This kind of thing happens because many Japanese, lacking correct information and knowledge, just accept whatever is reported through television or magazines.
So I cannot have any great expectation of justice from a Japanese trial which utilizes only confessions as evidence. Many say that Japan wanted to imitate the American jury system but is this really so? I think that Japan should abandon this new system immediately!

In the report mentioned above however it cannot be ignored that 34.1% of the total surveyed believe in this innovation of the justice system and in the way it could change the degree of participation in public life by the people. Blogger Ajirogu is one of those who support the saiban'in seido as he explains in this post.

私は賛成の方なんですが、どうでしょうか。
なぜ賛成なのかと言うと、司法なり政治なりを、もっと自分達で作っていくようにした方がいいと思うからです。誰かに任せると言うのもひとつの方法ですけれども、民主主義というのは、自分達で国を作っていくという規律の維持の仕方ですし、仮にその誰かが間違えたり、判断する人たちの規律や能力が落ちたりして、非難することになっても、結論として、間違えてしまったことはもうどうにもなりません。自分達でやっていく、と言うことは、その人たちに任せた責任は、自分達で負わなければならないということですし。

I'm in favour [of this new system].
The reason is that, in administration of justice or politics, I think ‘we’ should be more ‘pro active’. Obviously, entrusting this task to others is one way to deal with it but democracy means also participating ourselves in the processes that make this country. If someone makes a mistake or the ability or the discipline of those who judge is flawed we may blame them but, at the end of the day, nothing would change that mistake. Whereas if we were to participate personally we would then take on the responsibility that we have thrust onto others, until now.

[…]

そして、われわれがうまく出来ない、と言ってやらないでいると、人を裁くと言うことに対して理解が全く深まりませんし、理解できなかったり、能力(?)が上がらない、ということは、結局、司法ということに対して全体のレベルが上がらないということでもあります。この能力アップというか、認識力アップというか、これからは逃れられないのだと思います。自分達の思うような国に住みたいのであれば。

Besides, if we keep on saying that ‘we are not able’ and don't do it, we will never understand wholly what judging a person means. Continuing in our ignorance our expertise wouldn't improve and neither would our awareness of the administration of justice.
So I believe that in future people must commit themselves to raising the general level and awareness [of justice] without evading the responsibilities if they still desire to live in a country as they want it to be.

Also Shoryu Akizaka (秋坂昇龍) declares himself in favour and stresses the importance of the participation also of those people who don't have any knowledge of legal matters.

我々一般人は、日常でそれほど法律を意識して生活していない。一つは犯罪に巻き込まれる、あるいは巻き込むことを大多数が前提として生活しておらず、それらが非日常的風景であること。二つ目は法律よりも感情や一般常識を判断材料にしながら、物事に対応していることが理由として挙げられる。そして裁判員に求められているのが、まさにこれらのことなのではないだろうか

We common people live our everyday lives without being really aware of the law. First of all, most of us are not involved nor do we involve others, in criminal actions, because these are extraordinary cases.
Secondly our responses and our judgments would be based more on emotions and common sense than on laws. I think that this is what [the lawmakers] had in mind when they decided to introduce the lay judge system.

[…]

裁判員制度に反対する意見の中に「知識もないのに人を裁くことなどできない」というものがあったのだが、元々一般市民に専門知識を求めておらず、逆に無知であることを求めているからこその裁判員制度だろう。
知識の乏しい人は、時に想像すらしなかった突拍子もない意見を述べたりすることがある。無知が生み出す発想力には、時として驚かされるものだ。知識という“鎧”を纏っていない分、柔軟な発想ができるのである。

Many of those who are against the new system stated that ‘I can't judge anybody because I have no knowledge [on these matters]’. However, what is expected from citizens is not expert knowledge but, on the contrary, the very fact that they are not mired [in legal niceties].
People with little legal knowledge can express their unique, sometimes unpredictable opinions. These ideas born from commom sense may be insightful and [for lay people] it is easier to produce flexible ideas when the rigid conventions of legal knowledge would be a hindrance.

While many bloggers express their opinions on the positive or negative effects of the system in the immediate future, some such as Like_an_Arrow, express their disagreement after a long discourse taking as a starting point previous discussion of the problem and an analysis of the principles of the Constitution.

いま読み返してみても、裁判員制度に対する私の基本的なスタンスは変わっていません。[…]私の主張は、そもそも一般市民が刑事裁判の審理に参加すること自体がおかしいのではないかというものでした。 ですから、欧米を中心とした先進諸国で陪審制や参審制が当たり前に採用されているという事実も、裁判員制度を正当化する根拠として認めたくないのです。これは世界の常識の方がおかしい。少なくとも、陪審制や参審制などというものは、すでに歴史的使命を終えた過去の制度であって、これからの時代の民主主義を先導していく制度ではないと私は考えるのです。

Re-reading [the post I wrote 4 years ago], I have to say that my basic stance about the lay judge system hasn't changed that much.[…] In my opinion, the very fact that common citizens can participate in a court trial is odd. Consequently I cannot consider a valid justification for this change the fact that the American and European jury systems or the participatory system have been taken as model without calling them into question. There is something wrong in trusting people’s common sense. Lay judge system and jury system belong in the past and have accomplished their historical mission; I believe that they do not represent the right system to carry out the principles of democracy from now on.

もともと市民による司法参加という思想は、国王や君主の専横に対して民衆の権利を守るために生まれて来たもので、市民社会の成立という歴史的な文脈のなかで捉えるべきものです。

The origin of the participation of citizens in the administration of justice was the necessity to protect the people's rights against the tyranny of a King or Emperor and in considering the question the historical context in which a society developed [such mechanisms] should be significant.

[…]

ところが、陪審制の長い歴史を持つ欧米諸国でも、現在では市民が国を相手取って行なう訴訟については陪審員による裁判は行なわれていません。
[…]日本が真似をしようとしているのは、この形骸化してしまった現代の陪審制です。もしも本当にこの国の司法を民主化したいのなら、国が訴えられている公害訴訟や靖国訴訟のようなものをこそ、裁判員制度の対象とすべきだろうに。

However, also in Europe and in the U.S., where the jury system tradition is long, nowadays in the lawsuits where the citizens oppose to the State, the trials are held without any popular juries. […] What Japan is trying to imitate is a jury system that has already become a mere name.
If it really had any intentions to democratize the administration of justice, it should employ lay judges in those trials where the State is sued such as those about environmental pollution cases or about the Yasukuni question.

3 comments

  • […] wrote a post [en] about the repercussions that the new lay judge system might have on the sex crime victims. According to the blogger, “there is a possibiliy that […]

  • Dav

    “People with little legal knowledge can express their unique, sometimes unpredictable opinions. These ideas born from commom sense may be insightful…”

    Unfortunately, and I’m not trying to offend anyone, social common sense seems to be generally underdeveloped in this country. I wonder if this process will help to develop it, or just cause some terrible decisions.

  • For more scare about lay judges, the movie “Twelve Gentle Japanese” (adaptation of “12 angry men”).
    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0104330/

Cancel this reply

Join the conversation -> Dav

Authors, please log in »

Guidelines

  • All comments are reviewed by a moderator. Do not submit your comment more than once or it may be identified as spam.
  • Please treat others with respect. Comments containing hate speech, obscenity, and personal attacks will not be approved.

Receive great stories from around the world directly in your inbox.

Sign up to receive the best of Global Voices!

Submitted addresses will be confirmed by email, and used only to keep you up to date about Global Voices and our mission. See our Privacy Policy for details.

Newsletter powered by Mailchimp (Privacy Policy and Terms).

* = required field
Email Frequency



No thanks, show me the site