Who Rules Japan?

Who Rules Japan?

Popular Participation in the Japanese Legal Process

Edited by Leon Wolff, Luke Nottage and Kent Anderson

The dramatic growth of the Japanese economy in the postwar period, and its meltdown in the 1990s, has attracted sustained interest in the power dynamics underlying the management of Japan’s administrative state. Scholars and commentators have long debated over who wields power in Japan, asking the fundamental question: who really governs Japan? This important volume revisits this question by turning its attention to the regulation and design of the Japanese legal system. With essays covering the new lay-judge system in Japanese criminal trials, labour dispute resolution panels, prison policy, gendered justice, government lawyers, welfare administration and administrative transparency, this comprehensive book explores the players and processes in Japan’s administration of justice.

Chapter 2: Judging Japan’s new criminal trials: early returns from 2009

David T. Johnson and Satoru Shinomiya

Subjects: asian studies, asian law, law - academic, asian law, politics and public policy, public policy


In August 2009 Japan began a new trial system in which citizens sit with professional judges to adjudicate guilt and determine sentence in serious criminal cases. This change injects a meaningful dose of lay participation into Japanese criminal trials for the first time in 66 years. Japan had a jury system of sorts from 1928 to 1943, but it was seldom used for several reasons: because defendants could choose whether to be tried by jury and, when they elected that form of adjudication, they were required to relinquish certain rights to appeal; because the jury only answered a set of interrogatories framed by a judge who could reject its findings of fact; because jury trials were expensive and difficult to administer; and because (some analysts believe) a Japanese preference for hierarchy caused defendants to prefer judgment by professionals rather than by peers. The old jury system also generated much higher acquittal rates than those that prevailed before or since – 17 percent for the nation as a whole and more than 60 percent in some cities – leading some prosecutors and judges to welcome the demise of an institution that made it difficult for the state to convict (Johnson, 2002, p._42; Hayashi, 1987). By 1943 the Pacific War was turning against Japan, and the nation’s leaders came to view the jury system as an extravagance (Johnston, 2009; Okahara, 1943). The original Jury Act (No. 50 of 1923) was suspended that year; while the law was in force, only 484 persons chose to be tried by their peers – less than 2 percent of all eligible defendants.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Elgaronline requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals. Please login through your library system or with your personal username and password on the homepage.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/ extracts and download selected front matter and introductory chapters for personal use.

Your library may not have purchased all subject areas. If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Further information