The rise of shaming paternalism in Japan: recent tendencies in the Japanese criminal justice system

Abstract

The ‘reintegrative shaming’ and ‘benevolent paternalism’ models, traditionally used to describe the Japanese criminal justice system, have been periodically criticised for their orientalist approach. Nevertheless, no critique addressed the fact that these models ignored the presence of long-lasting crime syndicates, the yakuza, in Japan. Meanwhile, since 1991 the Japanese government has passed different sets of anti-yakuza countermeasures, increasingly punitive towards members and ex-members of the criminal group, that transferred more policing and surveillance duties to common citizens. In light of the evolution of anti-yakuza countermeasures in the past 25 years, this article argues that an analysis of these laws and regulations can provide a chance to reappraise the ‘reintegrative shaming/benevolent paternalism’ models, and proposes ‘shaming paternalism’ as a more realistic description of the current Japanese criminal justice system. According to this model, criminals are shamed and struggle to reintegrate, and the state’s intrusiveness is operated at various stages. Given the gap in English-speaking literature regarding this topic, firstly the contents of anti-yakuza countermeasures are outlined, followed by an evaluation of their effects on the yakuza population. The levels of reintegration of ex-yakuza members are considered, corroborating the hypothesis that the contemporary Japanese criminal justice system is not focussed on reintegration: actually, the most recent tendencies show an increase in punitiveness and stigmatisation. The paper argues that this trend can be understood as an index of increasing authoritarianism in the Japanese government, and concludes that civil engagement is the only viable option of resistance.