Impact of the popular legal participation on forced confessions and wrongful convictions in Japan＇s bureaucratic courtroom： A cross-national analysis in the U.S. and Japan

The interrogation and lengthy detention of the accused by Japan＇s police and prosecutors without access to legal counsel has generated many forced confessions in Japan＇s criminal court. As results, past research estimated that a large number of innocent people have been falsely convicted, and some of them were even executed for crimes they have not committed. Since almost all of indicted cases result in convictions in Japan＇s criminal court, allegations of wrongful convictions have raised serious human rights issues, and the use of forced confessions in criminal proceedings has long been criticized by families of the accused, their attorneys, legal scholars, citizen activists, and international human rights groups. This paper examines whether or not the 2009 introduction of the Saiban-in Saiban （the quasi-jury trial）, where ordinary citizens deliberate together with Japan＇s bureaucratic judges, helps prevent instances of wrongful convictions. As Japan＇s high conviction rate has substantiated that the Japanese court may be another bureaucratic system that is more interested in preserving its own authority and maintaining the status quo, the infusion of non-bureaucratic legal participants into the traditional judicial process may create the potential to alter the nature of trial processes, the quality of deliberations, and thus ultimate outcomes of criminal trials. Based on interviews and survey responses from Japan＇s grand jury （i.e., Kensatsu Shinsa-kai, or prosecutorial review commission （PRC）） participants and American citizens who served in jury trials, the paper explores the ways in which civic participation in criminal processes may affect the quality of legal decision making in Japan＇s criminal court.