Crime and Punishment in By Thomas Ellis & Koichi HAMAI In the late 1990s, press coverage of police scandals in Since the Second World War,
In 2001 the then Japanese Prime Minister, Koizumi Junichiro, was moved to state, [1] ‘…in order to regain the trust of the people that ‘ And in his General Policy Speech to the 161st Session of the Diet on October 12, 2004, Koizumi said; ‘we must revive " A key question now for both academics and for Japanese politicians is whether Japan’s status as a low crime country is a myth or whether Japan has simply taken longer to conform to the almost law-like link between increasing development and increasing crime as observed in most other developed countries.
The evidence we have compiled indicates that the Japanese press, like the press in most comparable countries, is presenting a partial and inaccurate picture of current crime trends, but that the moral panic created by such coverage has had a very real effect not only on public perceptions but also on criminal justice policy and practice. Moral panics occur when societal change is rapid and existing social and economic structures appear threatened, as in While direct causality is difficult to ‘prove’ on such a broad scale, we present evidence and analysis to suggest the following train of events, as represented in the figure below.
The current ‘panic’ has been created by the same processes documented in other countries, in that taken-for-granted existing practices are exposed as a result of sudden and unusual degrees of scrutiny, rather than changes in the practices themselves. In Japan, the impact of the press focus on police competency scandals, and ultimately about effectiveness of the criminal justice system, started a train of events that has led to a severe mismatch between perceptions and actual levels of risk of victimization. At under 2 million offences for a population of over 120 million, The key police scandals that started the train of events discussed here were the Okegawa stalker murder in 1999 and the Tochigi lynch murder in 2000. In both cases, victims were killed mainly because of police inaction, evidencing the downside of kaiketsu or ‘informal resolution’, so favoured in western accounts of re-integrative justice. In reaction to sustained media coverage and criticism, the National Police Agency (NPA) showed a new willingness to accept their responsibility and even lack of competence. The NPA developed a new policy and issued instructions to prevent similar future events by requiring officers to accept and investigate all public reports of offences. This resulted in a dramatic rise in the number of ‘incidents’ recorded at police consultation desks, as Figure 2. demonstrates.
However, rather than the rise in relatively trivial crimes, the press focused on homicide and violent crime, which are the types of stories with high ‘news value in
The NPA policy shift since 2000, toward encouraging greater reporting of minor offences has produced a large increase in overall recorded violent crimes that are virtually unsolvable and this has devastated the police clear up rate. In reality, International Crime Victims Surveys show that the risk of becoming a victim (including of violent crime) between 2000 and 2004 was generally reduced, but the proportion reported to and recorded by the police increased. These surveys also show that
As with most comparable nations, the Japanese public’s fear of crime is not in proportion to the likelihood of being victimized. What is different is the scale of this mismatch. While To understand the public perception, in addition to press coverage and representations of crime, it is also important to understand the contribution of the victim support movement in The combined press and victims movement, rather than objective evidence, has had a direct impact on government. Two pieces of legislation were enacted on 1 December 2004, one to enhance treatment of victims of crime and the other to toughen punishment for offenders. The former ‘recognizes’ that the risk of becoming a victim is now greater for ordinary Japanese citizens, while the latter increased sentence length for violent crimes, and is explicit both in its belief that this will provide greater deterrence and in recognising the demands of victims. The ‘Iron Quadrangle’ between: the media; victims and advocates; National Police Agency and politicians; and experts (lawyers and psychiatrists), has institutionalized the enduring concern about crime and the idea that Japanese society is now in constant danger. It is certainly clear, from the ICVSs, that the Japanese public believe that crime is increasing rapidly, and that this has had led to more punitive attitudes to sentencing. Far form having a re-integrative perspective, they were the most likely choose custody as a way of reducing youth crime and second only to the In sum, the evidence shows that New legislation has not only imposed more severe punishment on offenders, but also widened the criminal justice net. A greater proportion of people who used to be diverted from the formal criminal justice process, are now included in the formal process, and a greater proportion of offenders who used to be tried in summary courts and sentenced to fines, are now dealt with by formal trial and sentenced to prison. Criminal justice agencies, especially the police and the public prosecutor’s office have gradually lost their discretion in using informal procedures due to the demands from victims. Western scholars have generally focused on the role of apology and forgiveness in everyday life and in criminal justice in Thomas Ellis is a Principal Lecturer in the Institute of Criminal Justice Studies, Koichi Hamai is a professor in the Corrections and Rehabilitation Research Center, The full version of this article was published in International Journal of the Sociology of Law (2006, Vol. 34 (3) pp.157-178.) Posted on The third Anglo-Japanese symposium on Criminal Justice and Corrections will take place on 3 & 4 March, 2007, Kyoto, Japan. The Topic for the symposium is: Policing, Prosecutions and Sentencing. Note: 1. Addressing the 6th crime Victim Support forum, 19th November 2001. |