In its recommendations to the government, the group pointed out that capital punishment “harbors fundamental problems” and said it “must not be allowed to continue as is.”
It unanimously recommended the establishment of an “official council” under the Diet and Cabinet to carry out the proposed review. The panel also called for executions to be put on hold until the council reaches a conclusion.
The discussion group was convened by the Japan Federation of Bar Associations, which is composed of 16 members. They include scholars, Diet members, a former prosecutor general, a former commissioner general of the National Police Agency, and the representative of a victim’s group. A member of The Asahi Shimbun’s editorial board also joined the group.
The recommendations included a list of specific issues, such as systems to eliminate the possibility of wrongful judgments, ways to support victims’ families and methods to accurately gather public opinion and disclose information about the death penalty.
Cesare Beccaria, the 18th-century Italian criminologist and economist, argued against the death penalty, saying, “The punishment of death is pernicious to society, from the example of barbarity it affords.”
On the other hand, the contemporary German philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724-1804) was all in favor of the death penalty, stating, “every murderer--anyone who commits murder, orders it, or is an accomplice in it--must suffer death.”
Since then, the debate on the merits of capital punishment has continued. More than 70 percent of countries have legally or practically abolished the death penalty. South Korea suspended executions a quarter of a century ago. In September, Taiwan’s judiciary imposed very strict conditions for applying the death penalty.
Decisions concerning judicial systems need to be made in a way that ensures they align with people’s values and universal human rights concepts. Particularly with regard to the death penalty, coherent debate on the topic is difficult unless the fundamental question of whether the goal of punishment is classical retribution as in “an eye for an eye” or crime prevention and maintaining social order.
However, in Japan, the national debate to “compare and align” key issues concerning the death penalty has not gained much traction.
At the outset of this century, a bipartisan group of lawmakers named the “League of Diet Members for the Abolition of the Death Penalty” moved to introduce a bill to create a death penalty system study group in the Diet. But it did not materialize.
The irreversible danger of carrying out a wrongful conviction was keenly felt by many when Iwao Hakamada, who was sentenced to death 56 years ago for the slayings of four family members, was recently acquitted in a high-profile case of false conviction.
There are essential doubts about whether the state should be allowed to take an individual’s life as punishment for a crime. Asahi Shimbun editorials have been calling for discussions to begin toward abolition of the death penalty.
We are eager to see the establishment of an official council to tackle this longstanding and complicated issue. Chief Cabinet Secretary Yoshimasa Hayashi said, “We are not considering it at the moment,” but what is currently needed is a process of finding consensus on this fundamental and profound question concerning criminal justice through open discussions.
Source: asahi.com, Staff, November 16, 2024
_____________________________________________________________________
Twitter/X | Instagram | Telegram | Contact Us
"One is absolutely sickened, not by the crimes that the wicked have committed,
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."
but by the punishments that the good have inflicted."
— Oscar Wilde
