Abstract
Japan recently ordered a string of death sentences for offenders with mental illness. Based on the verdicts, we describe cases where one or more psychiatrists conducted psychiatric evaluations for several months and testified in lay judge courts. We compared these cases with those in which the death penalty was avoided, or the mandating treatment order was applied. Additionally, we discuss a trend toward more severe punishment and Japanese cultural background seen in a public opinion survey. Moreover, we introduce a research report that concluded a strong correlation between the number of victims and death penalty verdict. In Japan, lay judge trials determine the sentencing of the defendant and the verdict of guilty or not guilty, and it can be difficult for psychiatrists to help lay judges understand psychiatric symptoms and the relationship between symptoms and criminal responsibility through their testimony. We believe the right to life is the most fundamental of human rights and that the death penalty is inhumane. The death penalty also eliminates the possibility of treatment or rehabilitation, despite the fact that psychiatrists should support the possibility of treatment or rehabilitation in all cases. Further, the Japanese Penal Code does not permit execution for those mentally ill deemed unable to receive sentence; however, it is unclear who will conduct these evaluations and how they will do so. We describe our beliefs of how psychiatrists should act in these situations.
Highlights
In 2009, the International Federation for Human Rights and the Center for Prisoners’ Rights wrote to the Japanese government, expressing strong concerns about executions in Japan, of people with mental illness [1]
After the 2008 introduction of the participating victim system and 2009 introduction of lay judge trials, there has been some difficulty in the testimony of a psychiatrist who conducted a psychiatric evaluation to assist lay judges in understanding the defendant’s psychopathology and determine a professional sentence
According to a public opinion survey, the proportion of citizens agreeing that “the death penalty should be abolished in all cases” peaked at 20.7% in 1975 and has since been decreasing gradually [6]
Summary
In 2009, the International Federation for Human Rights and the Center for Prisoners’ Rights wrote to the Japanese government, expressing strong concerns about executions in Japan, of people with mental illness [1]. Almost 10 years later, Japan ordered a series of death sentences for offenders with mental illness. Despite a global trend toward abolition of the death penalty, Japan is one of a minority of countries that continue to resort to executions [2]. A trend toward more severe punishment has been indicated in Japan. After the 2008 introduction of the participating victim system and 2009 introduction of lay judge trials, there has been some difficulty in the testimony of a psychiatrist who conducted a psychiatric evaluation to assist lay judges in understanding the defendant’s psychopathology and determine a professional sentence. Raise problems in practices and ethical points of view, and provide future recommendations
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
