November 28, 2024 7:30am
[Editorial]The private “Council to Consider Japan’s Death Penalty System” (chaired by Ryo Ida, professor at Chuo University Graduate School), which is made up of legal professionals, members of the Diet, and academics, has compiled recommendations to the Diet and the Cabinet. “There are many problems with the current system that cannot be ignored, and we cannot allow it to continue as it is,” he said, calling for the urgent establishment of a public council to consider the existence and abolition of the death penalty and the state of the system. .
The conference was launched in February, with the Japan Federation of Bar Associations serving as the secretariat. The 16 committee members were not limited to abolitionists, and included crime victims, religious figures, political and business figures, members of the press, as well as a former attorney general and former head of the National Police Agency.
Iwao Hakamada, who was forced to serve as a death row inmate for more than 40 years, was acquitted in a retrial in October. The people have just witnessed the reality of a miscarriage of justice and false charges that would have been irreversible had the sentence been executed.
Since the recommendations were based on a unanimous opinion, they do not set out a clear direction for retaining or abolishing the death penalty, but we should listen to problems pointed out in the system and its operation.
They called for consideration of a system to eliminate the possibility of miscarriages of justice in fact-finding and circumstances, which are important factors in deciding whether to impose the death penalty, not to mention errors in the identity of the culprit as in Hakamada’s case.
Regardless of whether the death penalty exists or not, this is a topic that cannot be ignored. The government also ordered the disclosure of information on matters such as the operation of the death penalty system. Since 2007, the Ministry of Justice has only released the names of those executed, the place of execution, and a summary of the case. The reasons why the person was selected for execution, the circumstances from the notification to the person to the execution, and the details of the treatment of death row inmates are kept secret.
The report points out, “In reviewing the death penalty system, important matters have not been clarified.The premise for the public to form correct opinions is lacking.” He called on the Diet to exercise its power to investigate national affairs and collect sufficient information. It is no exaggeration to say that the current situation is such that the sovereign is driven to a lack of information.
Additionally, a 2019 Cabinet Office poll found that 80% of the public supported the death penalty. However, it is true that amid the international trend of abolishing the death penalty, there are specific disadvantages such as the refusal of abolitionist countries to extradite criminals to Japan. The proposals cover a wide range of topics, including consideration of expanding support for victims.
In Japan, debate over the death penalty can be said to be at a slump due to insufficient information disclosure. I hope that the Diet and the government will take seriously the council’s recommendations and begin full-fledged discussions regarding the abolition of the death penalty and the prevention of miscarriages of justice and wrongful convictions.
Here are two PAA (Point, Authority, Application) related questions for the provided interview:
## World Today News: Special Interview
**Topic: Reevaluating Japan’s Death Penalty System**
**Guests:**
* **Professor Kyohei Sakurada**: Renowned criminologist and legal expert specializing in the Japanese justice system.
* **Yumi Hirose**: Human rights lawyer and advocate for death penalty abolition.
**Host:** Welcome to World Today News. Today, we delve into a critical ethical and legal debate gripping Japan: the future of the death penalty. Joining us are Professor Kyohei Sakurada and Ms. Yumi Hirose. Thank you both for being here.
**Section 1: The Council’s Recommendations**
**Host:** Professor Sakurada, the Council to Consider Japan’s Death Penalty System has issued its recommendations. They call for a public forum to discuss both the effectiveness and the morality of the death penalty. What are your initial thoughts on these recommendations?
**Professor Sakurada:**
**(Opens a discussion on the significance of forming a public forum, the benefits of diverse viewpoints, and potential challenges in reaching a consensus.)**
**Host:** Ms. Hirose, your organization has long advocated for the abolition of the death penalty. How do you see these recommendations impacting the broader conversation about capital punishment in Japan?
**Ms. Hirose:**
**(Expands on the council’s critical role in highlighting the systemic flaws of the death penalty system, its impact on victims’ families, and the need for international legal alignment.)**
**Section 2: The Hakamada Case: A Catalyst for Change?**
**Host:**
The recent case of Iwao Hakamada, a man who spent over 40 years on death row before being exonerated, has cast a stark light on the potential for miscarriages of justice within the system. Professor Sakurada, how has this case influenced public opinion on the death penalty?
**(Professor Sakurada discusses the impact of the Hakamada case on public perception, the potential for reform in light of this case, and whether similar cases may exist within the Japanese justice system.)**
**Host:** Ms. Hirose, for those who support the death penalty, how do you counter the argument that it provides a necessary deterrent to heinous crimes?
**Ms. Hirose:**
**(Offers insights on the lack of conclusive evidence proving a deterrent effect, highlighting alternative punishments and focusing on rehabilitation rather than retribution.)**
**Section 3: Transparency and Public Discourse**
**Host:**
The article mentions a concerning lack of transparency surrounding the execution process. Ms. Hirose, what specific information should be made public to ensure accountability and open dialogue?
**(Ms. Hirose articulates the need for greater transparency in death penalty proceedings, addressing the public’s right to know about the system and its impacts.)**
**Host:** Professor Sakurada, how can Japan balance the need for national security and justice with the ethical concerns surrounding the death penalty?
**(Professor Sakurada offers a nuanced perspective on balancing national security concerns with the ethical considerations, exploring alternatives to the death penalty in cases involving terrorism or serious crimes.)**
**Section 4: Looking Ahead: The Future of Capital Punishment in Japan**
**Host:**
in your view, what are the most crucial steps Japan needs to take in the coming years regarding the death penalty debate?
**(Open-ended questions to both guests: their visions for the future of capital punishment in Japan, the potential for legislative changes, and the role of civil society in shaping policy.)**
**Host:** Thank you both for sharing your expertise and perspectives on this complex and critical issue.
**(End Interview)**
This interview structure, with its combination of open-ended questions and thematic sections, aims to provide a nuanced and insightful discussion on the multifaceted debate surrounding Japan’s death penalty system. It encourages exploration of various viewpoints, promotes critical thinking, and sheds light on the ethical, legal and social dimensions of this issue.
