Judicial system of Japan

In the judicial system of Japan, the Constitution of Japan guarantees that "all judges shall be independent in the exercise of their conscience and shall be bound only by this constitution and the Laws" (Article 76). They cannot be removed from the bench "unless judicially declared mentally or physically incompetent to perform official duties", and they cannot be disciplined by executive agencies (Article 78). Supreme Court judges, however, may be removed by a majority of voters in a referendum that occurs at the first general election following the judge's appointment and every ten years thereafter. The judiciary was far more constrained under the Meiji Constitution than it is under the present Constitution and had no authority over administrative or constitutional law cases. Moreover, the Ministry of Justice had complete and direct control over the courts' administrative affairs. Nonetheless, Professor John Haley argues that the courts maintained complete independence in the adjudication of particular cases.^[1]^: 99 "Judicial independence from the political branches was emphatically established as a fundamental principle of governance in Article 57 of the Meiji Constitution. Of all branches of government only the courts exercised authority 'in the name of the Emperor' (天皇ノ名, Tennō no mei)."^[1]^: 115 Haley argues that this was and remains a matter of great pride for Japanese judges and notes that "placed prominently in all courtrooms was the inscription 'in the name of the Emperor' as a meaningful reminder to imperial officials and subjects alike that the Emperor's judges were not subject to political control or direction."^[1]^: 115^[2]

A key feature of Japanese courts is the emphasis on wakai (和解) settlements by mutual agreement of the parties, with no loser or winner. These settlements have the same effect as a court judgement (Code of Civil Procedure, article 267; Civil Execution Act, article 22). For example, in 2016, the District Courts issued 63,801 judgments and orders, and 52,957 claims were solved by wakai settlement. In the Summary Courts, the numbers were 186,808 and 40,509 respectively.

Historically, courts in Japan were following the inquisitorial procedure, for example in a shirasu court (白州) in the Edo era, where the Chief Magistrate (奉行 bugyō) was also the prosecutor. After 1890, Japan was influenced by the European inquisitorial style of French and German law, where judges and the prosecutor had the responsibility to find the fact and apply the law. After 1948, the courts in Japan were influenced by the American adversarial system.

In 2021, similar to the previous year, Japan ranked 15th in the World Justice Project's Rule of Law Index, placing the country 3rd among the G7 economies.^[3]

^ ^a ^b ^c Haley, John Owen (2007). "The Japanese Judiciary: Maintaining Integrity, Autonomy and the Public Trust". Law in Japan: A Turning Point. University of Washington Press. pp. 99–135. ISBN 978-0-295-98731-6. JSTOR j.ctvcwnpnw.
^ Haley, John Owen (2006). The spirit of Japanese law. Athens: University of Georgia Press. pp. 97–106. ISBN 0-8203-2887-1. OCLC 71801410.
^ "WJP Rule of Law Index". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2022-08-07.

[hal-1] Haley, John Owen (2007). "The Japanese Judiciary: Maintaining Integrity, Autonomy and the Public Trust". Law in Japan: A Turning Point. University of Washington Press. pp. 99–135. ISBN 978-0-295-98731-6. JSTOR j.ctvcwnpnw.

[2] Haley, John Owen (2006). The spirit of Japanese law. Athens: University of Georgia Press. pp. 97–106. ISBN 0-8203-2887-1. OCLC 71801410.

[3] "WJP Rule of Law Index". worldjusticeproject.org. Retrieved 2022-08-07.

[1]

[2]

[3]