Jury system starts in Japan amid lingering concerns

Thursday 21st May, 06:14 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 20 Total Comments Show All

gogogo at 09:08 AM JST - 21st May

faster, friendlier and more reliable

So they are basically saying the previous system was slow, not friendly and unreliable.
Laguna at 09:25 AM JST - 21st May

And they won't even have any Michael Jackson or OJ Simpson-type trials!
medievaltimes at 09:27 AM JST - 21st May

It will take a year or two to work out the kinks of the system as it pertains to Japanese society. But, this system will be an improvement over the current 99% conviction rates, lack of proper evidence, bogus confessions etc.
NeoJamal at 12:31 PM JST - 21st May

Let's all say he is not guilty now so we can go home early and not be marked for dearh by his associated still at large.
Statistician at 01:08 PM JST - 21st May

@gogogo

So they are basically saying the previous system was slow, not friendly and unreliable.

And if it is slow unfriendly and unreliable for the really serious stuff that will now attract a lay jury how much slower and even more unfriendly and unreliable does it remain for the 'run of the mill' accused in the dock?
Mittsu at 03:16 PM JST - 21st May

bet these are the longest meetings in the world.
Yelnats at 03:30 PM JST - 21st May

I agree with Mitsu. These people won't be able to do it. If someone disagrees, they will bully and shame him/her and make them change their vote.
andrewfx51 at 07:11 PM JST - 21st May

Despite the flaws in the system it is a step in the right direction. For reference, a decision cannot be rendered if all the civilians and all the judges have opposing opinions, however, I do not doubt that in some circumstances, the judges may influence the opinions of the 'jurors'
amerijap at 03:40 AM JST - 22nd May

I wouldn't oppose to the newly introduced jury personnel system, however, we should be noted that this is the representative form of civic participation that assumes the disciplines of argumentation and debate. This means that the ordinary citizens should be well disciplined for the cultivation of deliberations in order to participate in a critical-decision making process at a court-trial. The undeniable fact is that the vast majority of Japanese people are completely ignorant of basics in argumentation, due to their lack of discipline through their entire education. Argument is NOT the same as opinion which is primarily based on individual thoughts, preferences, and conventional wisdom. Arguments in court are LEGAL RHETORIC that stands apart from the personal thoughts and opinions by TV commentators, politicians and journalists in the news editorials or in-depth news coverage.

Selected individuals need to be instructed with careful guidance and intensive trainings before they participate in court case, or otherwise what do you expect them for an analysis of court-case, testimonies, and cross-ex?

Also, I don't see any point in individuals' participation in determining the sentence-- which is quite another matter from passing a judgment.
nigelboy at 03:51 AM JST - 22nd May

The undeniable fact is that the vast majority of Japanese people are completely ignorant of basics in argumentation, due to their lack of discipline through their entire education.

Objection, The counsel is assuming facts not in evidence!

Judge: "Sustained".
nutsagain at 05:28 AM JST - 22nd May

And the collective voice of long term residents cries in unison; bollix! The 'evidence' is in front of your very eyes... and on a daily basis. Japanese logic is in a single word; loopy. Just yesterday I copped another shining example unrelated to the lay-judge issue but is shows how nutty people can be in this country.

Nuts leans out of car window to ask female driver with infant bouncing on the front seat and hands against the windshield waiting at the same lights; 'Why don't you put your kid in a seatbelt'?

Smiling, ''Oh, my child doesn't like to wear one.' then roared of to then be seen picking up a cell phone to take a call.

I rest my case.
amerijap at 05:37 AM JST - 23rd May

Objection, The counsel is assuming facts not in evidence!

Judge: "Sustained".

I'm not interested in a mock cross-ex you set up, but if you want to know about Japanese people's general lack of discipline in argumentation and debate, you should check the Ministry of Education, Sports, Science, and Technology's education policy(and if necessary, do the research on core curriculums at Japanese schools. There's absolutely no room in Japanese literature, social science, or any other subjects JP students will encounter argumentation and debate at JP schools. They might learn some from Oral Communication at highs cool English class, but it doesn’t cover much as a discipline. Even most JP colleges and universities do not offer such classes, except for communication departments.
amerijap at 06:02 AM JST - 23rd May

highs cool I mean 'high school' my bad :P
nigelboy at 06:28 AM JST - 23rd May

Ministry of Education, Sports, Science, and Technology's education policy(and if necessary, do the research on core curriculums at Japanese schools. There's absolutely no room in Japanese literature, social science, or any other subjects JP students will encounter argumentation and debate at JP schools

Reading is fundamental.

http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/shotou/new-cs/qa/02.htm

Debate Koshien

http://nade.jp/koshien/past.html

But hey. It's overrated since it appears it didn't do you any good.
amerijap at 08:08 AM JST - 23rd May

Serving as a jury-personnel means that you should be able to have some skills and knowledge in argumentation, because that's the salient character of legal discourses. And it goes beyond the realm of practical debate in an academic sphere. Argumentation is different from making personal opinions/thoughts without justifications-- which is the tendency among Japanese people, and even some westerners. This is the reason why the government administration needs to be cautious in selecting the individuals for jury-personnel. The duties require the selected citizens the intensive trainings to get ready for the practice of legal rhetoric in court.