Japanese Criminal Justice System’s Characteristics

A criminal justice plan is an approach to law implementation that involves arresting, arraigning, defending, and sentencing the lawbreakers. Japan has five distinctive courts, summary, district, family, high court, and supreme tribunals. The legal system formulation embarks on law enforcement, promoting integrity to the complainants and guaranteeing public safety. A substantial number of judges are assigned the role of redeeming justice truth regarding the offense committed. The country requires to set rules and regulations that can initiate excellent performance of the law system. Japan is characterized by three criminal justice structures, which encounter internal objections when serving justices to the public.

Japan’s high conviction rate distinguishes its criminal justice system in the world. The police is a significant feature department in Japan since it is responsible for law enforcement at the federal level (Koga 49-73). The sector has a more potent mandate than the tribunal in the jurisdiction of cases in the territory. The police have the power to dismiss contexts or divert them to a conversational complexion to fulfill their wishes. They are employed in all diplomatic amenities to ensure security oversight of all public employees, property, and the nation’s borders. The criminal bench of Japan states that the accused is innocent until confirmed guilty by the court statutes, although particular occurrences such as graft undermine courtroom rulings.

The police are mandated to arrest the suspects and detain them for a certain period allowing them to contact their family members or lawyers. For instance, Teppei, an actor in the “I Just Didn’t Do It” film, was apprehended by police and confined before the court proceedings. He did not converse with family members or a lawyer, which represented the government’s impunity and denial of the right of expression (Prusa 261-277). In addition, the police demanded Teppei’s confession of his offense, which contributed to his imprisonment. A government ruled by corrupt people forcefully convicts people without a piece of relevant evidence to support the claims. The administration needs to abide by the constitutional laws when sentencing citizens to enhance impartiality. The strategy will enhance equal freedoms for both the plaintiff and the convict.

Judges are a symbol that portrays criminal justice in Japan. They play a vital role in national prosecutions and are independent practising concise conclusions that abide by the country’s laws. The officers are skilled in maximization of integrity and rectitude, which promotes cooperation during courts proceedings in public courtrooms. According to (Richman 291) judges work with cops to assemble a case that controls investigative techniques, such as issuing warrants and cooperation agreements in Japan. The demeanor limits the lawbreakers’ to access an attorney during the prosecution of the cases. Japan needs to employ more reasonable judges to serve the nation without favor or prejudice.

Japan has a different system of criminal justices that disrespect the accused people’s rights. Teppei, an actor in the “I Just Didn’t Do It,” movie narrates: “At least I can judge the judge,” (Calorio & Giorgio 83-112) meaning he can disclose the truth about the judge’s actions. Teppei’s confinement lasted for three months due to the accusation of a sexual assault on a schoolgirl, which translates to how Japan judiciary sentences innocent citizens without evidence. Rajput & Muhammad (265-268) postulates that Japan has the highest judgement rate of 99%, whereby the police and the public prosecutors contribute to the issue. The judges follow directives from the government to execute guilty verdicts on the citizens rather than obeying the constitution. Secondly, the judges have an extensive preference to charge despite the condition of the transgression, age, or personality.

The correctional facilities managed by the Ministry of Justice are a significant attribute in Japan. The centers are incorporated to rehabilitate and reform the accused for a specific period. According to Vanoverbeke (743-740), Japan has shown a low crime rate due to its robust authority system in the last few decades. The facilities transform the victims’ lives since they acquire educational skills, which help them to secure employment after detention. In addition, Baradel (23-41), social and cultural aspects have influenced the criminal law practices. Japanese have distinctive artistic beliefs when people commit crimes, and therefore, cleansing procedures signify culture in society. The government should increase the number of rehabilitation centers to accommodate all the culprits held accountable for illegal acts in the nation.

Teppei was imprisoned in a correctional center to confess his guilt to the authorities. His presentation in the court without enough evidence was malicious conduct of the court. In addition, Teppei’s lawyer’s decision to quit the case was a mischief that should be communicated to the public prosecutors to minimize clients’ dissatisfaction. In the correspondent to Gershowitz (307), there is accruing misdemeanor trend that has revealed poor performance in the judicial service. The attributes recommend the employment of strict measures to curb the defiance for the civil benefit of the territory. Further, Japan needs to increase the number of judges and security officers to lower the level of crime.

The film “I Just Didn’t Do It” made Japan to attain considerable law reforms, for example, the Lay Judge system. In 2009, the new system was executed with different legislative organs, such as Supreme Court and other tribunals, working together to boost the change. In addition, the movie helped the Japanese to comprehend the legal process and law amendments that constituted their rights and freedoms. Japan must eradicate traditional aspects of jurisdiction and adopt new strategies to maneuver fairness to all citizens. Japan’s administration should impose new tactics to diminish civil servant misconduct in the judiciary. Further, the judges should execute justice to the criminal according to the constitutional regulations.

Works Cited

Baradel, Martina. “The Rise of Shaming Paternalism in Japan: Recent Tendencies in the Japanese Criminal Justice System.” Trends in Organized Crime, vol.24, no.1, 2021, pp. 23-41.

Calorio, Giacomo, and Giorgio Fabio Colombo. “Inside a Frame, Behind a Glass. A Preliminary Inquiry on Law and Film in Japan.” Law and Humanities, vol.14, no.1, 2020, pp. 83-112.

Gershowitz, Adam M. “The Challenge of Convincing Ethical Prosecutors that their Profession has a Brady Problem.” Ohio State Journal Criminal Law. vol.16, 2018, p. 307.

Koga, Kei. “Japan’s ‘Indo-Pacific’ Question: Countering China or shaping a New Regional Order?” International Affairs, vol. 96, no.1, 2020, pp. 49-73.

Prusa, Igor. “Japanese Scandals and their Ritualization.” Japan Forum, vol. 33, no. 2. Routledge, 2021.

Rajput, Muhammad Arif, and Muhammad Riaz Rajput. “Impact of Defective Investigation and Prosecution on Trial.” Social Sciences, vol. 9, no.6, 2020, pp.265-268.

Richman, Daniel C. “Law Enforcement Organization Relationships with Prosecutors.” The Oxford Handbook of Prosecutors and Prosecution, 2021, p. 291.

Vanoverbeke, Dimitri. “Protecting the Script of the Japanese Criminal Justice System.” Law & Social Inquiry, vol. 47, no.2, 2022, pp. 734-740.