Japan and Civil Jury Trials
Show Less

Japan and Civil Jury Trials

The Convergence of Forces

Matthew J Wilson, Hiroshi Fukurai and Takashi Maruta

As societies around the world increasingly face complex challenges, effective solutions are at a premium. In response, reformers have advanced varied forms of jury systems as means of fostering positive political, economic, and social change. Many countries have recently integrated lay participation into their justice systems to effect fundamental societal change, advance public policymaking, and manifest popular sovereignty. This book showcases Japan’s successes and challenges in recently adopting a quasi-jury system for serious criminal trials, and advocates that the convergence of various forces makes this an ideal time for Japan to expand lay participation into the civil realm.
Buy Book in Print
Show Summary Details
You do not have access to this content

Chapter 6: Expanding lay participation into the civil realm

Matthew J Wilson, Hiroshi Fukurai and Takashi Maruta


Civil dispute resolution plays a vital role in shaping any society. It constitutes the core of any legal system and popular base. In light of the substantial impact that certain civil and administrative matters can have upon society combined with Japan’s efforts to successfully integrate citizen adjudication into criminal trials, it is an ideal time for Japan to earnestly consider introducing lay participation into the legal decision-making process in certain civil trials. An all-citizen jury would be ideal in terms of resources, public involvement and transparency. However, a mixed tribunal system akin to the current lay judge panels would be a substantial improvement over the present system and could help attain the objectives underlying recent legal reforms. As countries across the globe continuously confront rapid change and various pressures, they have been increasingly receptive to citizen involvement in the justice system. More specifically, civic reformers have often viewed a jury system, broadly defined as encompassing traditional juries consisting of only laypersons or mixed tribunals comprised of laypersons and professional judges, as a valuable vehicle for enriched civic engagement and a means of compelling positive political, economical and even social change. Juries can enable self-governance and facilitate checks on individuals, industry and government. Having average citizens function as neutral fact-finders can also help the justice system attain a greater level of respect and legitimacy.

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

or login to access all content.