Trans News > その他 > 死刑問題

日本の死刑問題関連記事
Newspaper Articles on Japan's Death Penalties

(斜字・ハイパーリンクは引用者)

uploaded 2003/02/16

時事 2003/02/13

終身刑導入法案提出に意欲＝死刑廃止に向け、亀井氏

　超党派の国会議員でつくる「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」の亀井静香会長（自民党前政調会長）らは１３日午後、衆院議員会館で、来日中の欧州評議会議員会議のシーダー議長と会談した。

　席上、亀井氏は「死刑廃止に向けた一里塚として終身刑を導入する法案などを準備している。必ず実現したい」と述べ、今国会に同法案を提出したいとの意向を示した。これに対し、シーダー氏は「欧州でも多くの人が死刑廃止に反対だったが、勇気ある政治家がこうした声に逆らって廃止を決断した」と述べ、同議連の活動に期待を表明した。

　欧州評議会議員会議は英仏など４４カ国の国会議員の代表で構成され、人権擁護活動などを行っている。　（時事通信）

毎日 2003/02/06

国際司法裁判所：メキシコ国籍の死刑囚３人に執行延期命令　

　【ハーグ森忠彦】国際司法裁判所（オランダ・ハーグ）は５日、死刑制度がないメキシコが米国内に収監されているメキシコ国籍の死刑囚の執行停止を求めた訴訟で、執行が迫った３人の仮保全（執行延期）命令を言い渡した。死刑の是非をめぐる論議が起こっている米国の対応が注目される。

　メキシコは１月、「米国はメキシコ国籍者を逮捕（殺人容疑）した際に現地のメキシコ領事に通知しなかった。これは自国民保護の観点から領事への通知義務を定めたウィーン領事関係条約に反する」として、テキサスなど１０州に収監されている死刑囚５４人の執行延期や将来にわたる自国民への執行停止を求めた。中でも執行が近い３人の仮保全を申請していた。

　残りの５１人についても同裁は「判決を急ぐ」としたことで事実上、米国に刑の執行の猶予を求めた。

　９９年にドイツが米国を相手に同様の訴訟を起こした際には、同裁判所が死刑執行停止の仮保全を認めたものの米国は「国家主権にかかわる問題」として刑を執行した。

　米国の基本姿勢は変わらないとみられるが、米国内では１月、イリノイ州で退任直前の前知事が１６７人（メキシコ人３人を含む）の死刑囚の減刑を発表。死刑を巡る議論が再燃している。

毎日 2003/02/04

＜死刑廃止議員連＞映画「１３階段」を試写　制度見直し訴える

　超党派の「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（会長・亀井静香前自民党政調会長）は４日、国会近くの憲政記念館で、えん罪に問われた死刑囚を描いた映画「１３階段」の試写会を開いた。出席した福島瑞穂社民党幹事長は「裁判には誤審の可能性がつきまとっている」と死刑制度の見直しを訴えた。映画は８日公開される。（毎日新聞）

毎日 2003/01/12

米国：
死刑囚１５６人全員を一括して減刑　イリノイ州知事　

　【ニューヨーク上村幸治】米イリノイ州のライアン知事（共和党）は１１日、州の司法システムに問題があったと指摘した上で、州内の死刑囚１５６人全員を一括して減刑にしたと発表した。米国は先進国の中で飛び抜けて死刑執行の多い国として知られており、未成年者の死刑を認めている州もある。今回の措置は、国民レベルでの死刑論議を呼びそうだ。

　今回の措置により、３人が有期刑に切り替えられ、残りは仮釈放なしの終身刑に減刑された。知事はさらに、別の事件で死刑判決を受けている未確定囚１１人についても恩赦にした。

　同州では、７７年に死刑制度が復活して以来、１３人が間違って死刑判決を受けていたことがＤＮＡ鑑定などで判明した。このため知事は、３年前にすべての死刑の執行を一時停止させ、調査を続けていた。

　１０日には、４人の死刑囚に対し「警官の拷問によって、うその自白を強要されていた」として恩赦を与えていた。このうち３人は、即日釈放された。

　知事はこの日、警察の取り調べだけでなく、裁判制度も「不公平で非道徳的だった」と述べた。被害者の家族には「同情するが、行動しないわけにはいかない。無実の人を処刑してしまうというリスクを冒すわけにはいかない」と伝えた。

　被害者の家族は反発しており、検察当局からも批判の声が出ている。その一方、イリノイ大学から、ライアン知事をノーベル平和賞候補に推薦しようという動きが出ている。

　ライアン氏は、１３日に知事を退任することが決まっている。後任のロッド・ブラゴジェビッチ氏（民主党）は「事件はケース・バイ・ケースで判断しなければならない。全員をそろって減刑にするというのは大変な間違いだ」と批判した。米国では、メリーランド州も昨年から、死刑の執行を一時停止している。

毎日 2003/01/12

死刑囚特赦：米州知事が拷問自白の４人　


　米イリノイ州のライアン知事は１０日、警察官の拷問による自白を証拠に殺人などの有罪判決を受けたとして、死刑囚４人の特赦を発表した。これだけ多数の判決見直しは米史上初めてという。

　知事は昨年１０月、州内の全死刑囚１６０人のうち減刑審査を申請した１４２人について死刑判決の妥当性を調べ直すよう囚人審査委員会に指示、同委の勧告を受けて今回の決定を下した。４人以外の結論は１１日に発表する予定。

　知事は「４人は殴られ、拷問された末の自白を根拠に有罪判決を受けたとの証拠がある。明白な不正義が行われた」と説明。別件で有罪判決を受けている１人を除き、３人が直ちに釈放される。

　ライアン知事は００年１月、１３人への死刑判決が間違いだったとの調査結果を受けて死刑執行を全面停止。すべての死刑判決を見直す方針を明らかにし、死刑の是非をめぐる全国的な論議に一石を投じていた。

　知事自身は州務長官時代の汚職疑惑で政治生命を事実上絶たれて再選立候補を断念、１３日で任期満了のため退任する。（ニューヨーク共同）

Japan Times 2002/12/21

Death penalty moratorium sought

A bipartisan group of lawmakers opposed to capital punishment asked Justice Minister Mayumi Moriyama on Friday to impose a moratorium on capital punishment for the duration of the Diet recess, the lawmakers said.
Moriyama ordered executions while the Diet was in recess last December and again in September, according to the Diet Members' League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty, led by former Liberal Democratic Party policy chief Shizuka Kamei.

The league, formed in April 1994, has 121 members.

When the next Diet session is convened in mid-January, the members will submit a bill to establish an ad hoc committee to debate the abolishment of capital punishment.

The committee will be set up either in the Diet or the Cabinet, the group's secretariat said earlier, adding it would study cases in other countries, hear opinions from experts and try to encourage public debate on the issue.

Hideo Kijima, a Lower House member of the Japanese Communist Party who met with Moriyama, said the justice minister did not discuss capital punishment when she met with the group. However, Moriyama did say she will participate in discussions on the creation of the ad hoc committee if the bill is submitted to the Diet.

毎日 2002/12/20

死刑停止：
年末などに執行しないよう申し入れ　議員連盟


　「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（亀井静香会長）は２０日、国会閉会中の年末などに死刑を執行しないよう森山真弓法相に申し入れた。

　保守党を除く与野党３８人の議員の署名を提出。事務局長の保坂展人衆院議員（社民）らが、昨年、仕事納めの１２月２７日に死刑が執行されたことに触れ、「執行は死刑廃止の潮流に背を向けた非人道的行為だ」と執行しないよう求めた。　【伊藤正志】

AFP 2002/12/17

Japan's jails still hell holes
December 17 2002

Despite constant international pressure, Japanese prison conditions remain as harsh as ever, as illustrated by the recent death of an inmate in Nagoya jail following the use of a restraining device, according to penal rights activists.

"We want to appeal to the Council of Europe to launch an investigation about the situation in Japanese jails," lawyer Yuichi Kaido, the secretary general of the Centre for Prisoner's Rights told journalists recently.

He pointed out that the 44-member Council, Europe's broad-based human rights watchdog, had already threatened to remove Tokyo's observer status to the body if no progress was made on abolishing the death penalty by January 2003. Two to four prisoners are usually executed every year.

Kaido's organisation was founded in 1995 after it emerged that 10 inmates had been injured from the use of "leather handcuffs," a leather belt attached to manacles, likened by rights group Amnesty International to "medieval instruments of torture."

In May, a 49-year-old inmate at Nagoya prison in central Japan died after warders used the restraining device on him when he allegedly turned violent.

Recently five warders at the same prison were arrested for causing serious internal injuries to an inmate who had complained about earlier ill treatment by tightening the leather handcuff belt excessively.

Following a hard-hitting 1998 report by the United Nations Commission on Human Rights which said frequent use of the equipment could lead to cruel and inhumane treatment, the justice ministry issued a directive for prison warders to only use it if it was "absolutely necessary," Kaido said.

"Until then there were 2,000 cases (in which the belt was used) a year: after 1999 the number decreased to 500 to 600 a year but what happened in Nagoya prison means that the directive of the ministry did not work at all," he said.

Aside from the use of the restraining belt, Kaido said there were two other "serious human rights violations" in the Japanese prison system: the treatment of prisoners serving life sentences and the detention of prisoners in solitary confinement.

The number of inmates imprisoned for life obtaining parole is sharply declining, even though the penal code does not permit a life sentence without parole to be imposed, Kaido said.

"At the end of 2000, there were 1,047 prisoners sentenced to life imprisonment with parole, but only six of them were granted parole. Ten years ago, the numbers were around 30 -- it means most of those prisoners will end their life in prison without parole," Kaido said, adding one of them had been behind bars for more than 50 years.

The lawyer also condemned as open to abuse the vague wording of "violating the discipline or order of the prison," as an offence punishable by solitary confinement.

There are currently around 2,000 inmates in solitary confinement, Kaido said.

"At the end of 2001, there were 26 who had spent more than 10 years in solitary confinement, the longest term was 37 years and eight months."

While in a solitary cell, the prisoner is forced to kneel Japanese-style and forbidden to speak, even to the warders, without permission. Visits by relatives are strictly limited.

"They can only meet one family member, but if you have no family, you have to spend years and years without talking to anyone. It is an absolutely an overly cruel and inhumane treatment," Kaido said.

He added that although his organisation knew the whereabouts of the 26 held in solitary confinement for more than 10 years, their identities were unknown and the centre's members were not allowed to meet them.

Now the death sentence handed down to mother of four Masumi Hayashi for killing four people by poisoning curry with arsenic has highlighted the fact that the use of solitary confinement is not restricted to convicted criminals.

Hayashi spent much of the almost four years her trial lasted in solitary confinement in a windowless cell.

Michitake Sasaki, a Tokyo trade unionist specialising in lay-off negotiations and discrimination at work cases, has been arrested twice in connection with his union activities.

The second time he was held in detention for 10 months from 1999 to 2000 for disrupting the operation of a business with which he wanted to negotiate on behalf of a former employee, he told reporters.

After being taken into custody he was held for questioning by Tokyo police for over two months without access to a lawyer.

"The substance of the interrogations was not questioning on the particular labour dispute itself, but interrogators were advising me to stop labour union activities. Every single day for 62 consecutive days they did that," Sasaki said.

He said he was held in a windowless cell smaller than the size of two single mattresses, which had the light on permanently, preventing him from sleeping or gauging the passage of time, and denied treatment for hypertension that he requested.

Once he was moved to the Tokyo detention centre, Sasaki said he suffered from the cold and the lack of natural light and family visits: for three months his only outside contact was with his lawyers.

"After three months I could only see one relative of mine. The contact lasted ...a maximum of five minutes. What can you do in that time?" he said.

Sasaki also criticised the censorship of prisoners' diaries and correspondence with their lawyers as "illegal and unjustifiable".

"The authorities try to make it very difficult for the suspect at trial," he said. "Principles like innocence until pronounced guilty are absolutely not respected."

In November, Amnesty called for an independent investigation into the death of the prisoner in Nagoya prison and the ill-treatment of others there, and urged that an independent prison inspectorate be established.

AFP

朝日 2002/12/14

法律ある以上、死刑執行は役目　森山法相発言に議連反発

　森山法相が在任中、３度目の死刑執行を命じるかどうかが注目されている。この２０年間に３回以上、死刑執行を命じた法相はいないが、森山法相は国会が閉会した１３日、「法律がある以上、執行するのが法務省の立場だ」と発言。これに対し、死刑廃止議員連盟の議員らは、執行停止の署名集めを開始し、徹底抗戦の構えを見せている。

　８２年〜０１年に法相を務め終えた３１人のうち２度執行を命じたのは３人だけで、大半は１度か、あるいは命じていない。

　ところが、昨年４月に就任した森山法相はすでに、昨年１２月と今年９月の２度にわたって計４人に死刑執行を命じた。

　近年の執行は国会閉会中か、閉会前であっても実質審議が済んだ時期がほとんどだ。森山法相による２度の執行命令も閉会中だった。

　「会期中は、多忙を極める法相に死刑関係の資料を上げるのは適切ではないし、審議への影響を避ける面もある」（法務省関係者）との配慮からだ。

　これに対し、死刑廃止議員連盟会長の亀井静香代議士らは「これだけ問題提起がある中、わざわざ３回目の執行に臨むべきではない」と法相を牽制（けんせい）し、署名運動を始めた。

　議連は、死刑の存廃や代替刑などを議論する「死刑臨調」の設置を盛り込んだ法案を来年の通常国会に提出する準備を進めている。

　森山法相は１３日の記者会見で「法案の中身は承知していない。いろいろな意見があるのは承知している」と従来の見解を繰り返した。

(13:06)

Swiss Info (Switzerland) 2002/12/10

December 10, 2002 2:20 PM

Human rights campaign

Non-governmental organisations in Switzerland have staged campaigns for an end to the death penalty and other human rights abuses.

The main Swiss churches urged the governments of the United States, Japan and Saudi Arabia to abolish capital punishment.

For its part, Amnesty International said it hoped to collect 10,000 signatures for a petition calling on Russia to respect human rights in the conflict over the breakaway republic of Chechnya.

Several charities also pointed out the importance of free access to water resources as a basic right.

The campaigns are part of international human rights day.

毎日 2002/12/10

東京拘置所：
死刑囚２人の心身状態をめぐり、弁護団と対立

　えん罪を主張している２人の死刑囚の心身状態をめぐり、それぞれの弁護団と東京拘置所が対立している。袴田巌死刑囚（６６）は長期拘禁で精神に変調がみられ、冨山常喜死刑囚（８５）は高齢で健康状態が悪化している。両弁護団は「十分な医療が施されている保障がない」として、外部の医師の診断などを求めているが、同拘置所は応じていない。名古屋刑務所の暴行事件で、塀の中の閉鎖性が問われたが、死刑囚についても情報公開を求める声が出ている。

　元プロボクサーの袴田死刑囚は、６６年に静岡県清水市で経営者一家４人を殺害したとして、８０年に死刑が確定。一貫して無罪を主張してきたが、最近１０年間は弁護士との面会を拒否。親族の面会にもほとんど応じないという。

　４年近くにわたり２０回以上の面会を拒絶された姉が今月５日に会えたが、「こんな人知らん」などと言われ、話がかみ合わなかったという。

　刑事訴訟法では、死刑囚が心神喪失の状態にある時は、法相の命令で執行が停止される。再審請求をしている弁護団は、現状では心神喪失かどうか判断できないとして、外部の医師の診断を求めており、今後は医療施設への移送も求める方針。

　冨山死刑囚は、６３年に知人に青酸化合物のカプセルを飲ませて殺害したとして、７６年に死刑が確定したが、えん罪を主張。高齢のためほぼ寝たきりで、目もほとんど見えない。弁護団が今年１０月に同拘置所に照会したところ、動脈硬化や慢性腎不全のため、輸血や人工透析での治療をしているとの回答があった。

　しかし、拘置所はカルテや検査記録などの提示は拒否。弁護団は「治療が十分なのか客観的に判断できない」として、カルテなどの開示を求めていく。

　懲役刑の場合、７０歳以上の高齢の受刑者は刑の執行を停止できる規定が刑訴法にあるが、死刑囚には規定がなく、恩赦で刑の執行停止を求めることも検討中だ。

　同拘置所は、毎日新聞の取材に対し「個別の死刑囚について詳しくは述べられないが、適切な処置をとっている」と話している。　【伊藤正志】

　　　×　　　×　　　×

■受刑者らの国際的な処遇状況に詳しい熊本大の北村泰三教授（国際人権法）の話　

　日本の刑務所や拘置所では、接見など外部とのやりとりが極めて限られている。その現状に対し、国連の規約人権委員会が勧告するなど、日本は国際社会から批判されている。塀の中は見せないという行刑密行主義は通用しない。死刑囚についても、支援者が養子縁組しなければ面会できないような、いびつな構造を是正すべきだ。

Sydney Morning Herald 2002/12/02

Japan moves towards a debate on ending the death penalty
By Shane Green, Herald Correspondent in Tokyo
December 2 2002

Early one Wednesday in September Yoshiteru Hamada and Tatsuya Haruta received the news they had dreaded: within hours they would die.

The convicted murderers were among 50 prisoners on death row who had had their sentences confirmed. There was perhaps time to write a letter or tidy their belongings. And then to the gallows.

The day they were executed was September18, the day after North Korea's Kim Jong-il had stunned the Japanese Prime Minister, Junichiro Koizumi, by admitting his agents had kidnapped 13 Japanese nationals, eight of whom were dead.

Normally, executions are carried out on a Friday with little media coverage. But the saturation reporting of the kidnappings on this particular Wednesday apparently made it too good an opportunity to miss.

"It was quite unlikely the Government would be criticised in the media," said Makoto Teranaka, the secretary-general of Amnesty International in Japan, which is campaigning for the death penalty to be abolished.

And that was exactly what happened.

Yet in the past week things have started to change. The Japan Federation of Bar Associations has called for a moratorium on the death penalty so the nation can have a debate it has avoided.

In the Diet, the national parliament, the 121 MPs who form its bipartisan League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty will introduce legislation next year to establish a commission to study the issue. The group is also proposing the introduction of life imprisonment without parole to replace capital punishment.

About 100 prisoners in Japanese jails have been sentenced to death, usually for aggravated murder. Half have had their sentences confirmed.

The death penalty is carried out on the order of the justice ministry, or, in effect, whoever happens to be the justice minister. From 1989 to 1992 those who held the job exercised their own discretion and no one was executed.

Then in 1993 seven prisoners went to the gallows. Since then anywhere between two and six have been hanged each year.

Life on death row has its own miseries. Amnesty says visitors are restricted to family. "It is quite nearly incommunicado detention," Makoto Teranaka says. "This kind of isolation is itself a cruel punishment or treatment."

Then there is the uncertainty of who will be next. Sakae Menda, who was acquitted in 1983 after 30 years on death row, has told of the "constant dread". His anguished outbursts led him to being handcuffed to a metal belt around his waist for two months.

The Government cites opinion polls that show strong public support for the death penalty as a deterrent to serious crime.

But Professor Nobuyoshi Toshitani of Tokyo Keizai University said he had rarely seen academic papers that tried to prove the death penalty was a deterrent

. "I assume many believe this, but we need to examine and discuss it at a national level."

There is also international pressure. The Council of Europe (not linked to the European Union) has set a deadline of next month for Japan and the US to make progress on the death penalty or lose observer status at the council.

The Age (Australia) 2002/11/30

Japan questions gallows secrecy
November 30 2002

Doubts are growing about a capital punishment system in which criminals get little notice of their date with death. Shane Green reports from Tokyo.

Early on a Wednesday morning last September, Yoshiteru Hamada and Tatsuya Haruta received the news they had dreaded. Within hours, they would die.

Hamada and Haruta, both convicted murderers, were among the 50 prisoners on death row in Japan who had had their sentences confirmed, and were waiting for the noose. Now, in prisons either side of Japan, the two men were about to become the latest statistics in the country's secretive and often inhumane capital punishment program.

Like those who had gone before, they were only told they were to hang on the morning of their execution. There was perhaps time to write a letter, or tidy their belongings. And then the gallows.

Their executions registered little more than a passing mention in the Japanese media but that was, after all, what the Justice Ministry had apparently intended.

The date of their executions was September 18, the day after North Korea's Kim Jong Il admitted his agents had kidnapped 13 Japanese nationals, eight of whom were dead.

Normally, executions are carried out on a Friday, in the knowledge there will be little media coverage at the weekend. But the saturation reporting of the kidnappings on this particular Wednesday apparently made it too good an opportunity to miss.

"It was quite unlikely the government would be criticised in the media," said the Secretary-General of Amnesty International in Japan, Makoto Teranaka. And that was what happened. Another two executions in Japan, with little debate or coverage.

But in the past few weeks, there has been a glimmer of light. For the first time in its history, the Japan Federation of Bar Associations has called for a moratorium on the death penalty so the nation can engage in an overdue debate.

The federation acknowledges that its members remain divided on the issue but there have also been renewed attempts to generate a debate in the Diet, the national parliament.

The 121 MPs who form the Diet's bipartisan league for the abolition of the death penalty will introduce legislation next year to establish a commission on the issue. Japan is one of the few developed countries that imposes the death penalty. The other is the US, its post-war occupier and now closest ally. A big difference between the two is the level of transparency, with the US offering wide media coverage of executions. There are about 100 prisoners in Japanese prisons who have been sentenced to death, usually for aggravated murder. Half of those prisoners have had their sentences confirmed.

The death penalty is carried out on the order of the Justice Minister. Between 1989 and 1993, no one was executed. Then in 1993, seven prisoners went to the gallows. Since then, anywhere between two and six have hanged each year.

Life on death row also has its own miseries. According to Amnesty, visitors are restricted to family. "It is quite nearly incommunicado detention," says the group's Makoto Teranaka. "This kind of isolation is itself a cruel punishment or treatment."

A investigation published last year by the Council of Europe - not connected to the European Union - also told of death row prisoners being held in small cells where the lights are never switched off, only dimmed.

The Japanese Government justifies the death penalty on opinion polls that show strong public support, and its deterrent ability. Beyond a nascent national debate, the Japanese Government is also contending with international pressure. The Council of Europe has set a deadline of next January for both Japan and the US to make progress on the death penalty issue or loose their observer status to the council.

Tokyo, however, appears unmoved, falling back on the often-used defence of cultural differences between Japan and Europe. Quoted in The Japan Times, Justice Minister Mayumi Moriyama cited the Japanese expression of apology shinde waburi - atoning for your wrongs by killing yourself. "I think (that) shows our own view toward crimes," she said.

Japan Times 2002/11/24

CAPITAL PUNISHMENT MORATORIUM
Lawyers call for execution debate

The Japan Federation of Bar Associations agreed Friday to draft guidelines for legislation to place a moratorium on executions to provide an opportunity for public debate on the matter.
It is the first time the lawyers' group has presented a clear, unified position on the controversial issue, as attorneys have been divided regarding capital punishment. The group said it would begin lobbying the government and Diet lawmakers to enact such a law.

Federation officials said the decision came in response to an agreement by members that the death penalty should not be allowed to continue, given an insufficient amount of public discussion on the issue, inadequate measures to prevent false accusations, and a lack of objective evidence showing whether it actually serves as a crime deterrent.

The proposal, drawn up by a federation committee instructed to look into the issue of capital punishment, was presented to the federation's board of governors Friday.

On the international front, a majority of countries have abolished the death penalty, the panel said in its recommendations.

There is a danger that miscarriages of justice may occur under Japan's current death penalty system, the committee said, citing four cases in which retrials found the accused parties innocent of crimes they allegedly committed. It also said that the death penalty's deterrent effect had not been scientifically proven. And it cannot be denied that capital punishment is cruel, it added.

Panel members also criticized a public opinion survey carried out by the government in 2001 in which roughly 80 percent of the respondents said they supported the death penalty, saying the poll was conducted without disclosing sufficient information regarding capital punishment.

Killing the perpetrators does not necessarily help crime victims, the panel said, adding that victims would be better served through the establishment of a solid support system.

The committee also called for the introduction of a system in which government-appointed lawyers would be assigned to a suspect before indictment, and that a capital punishment sentence be unanimously supported by all judges at a trial.

Other recommendations include setting a new maximum penalty, including life in prison without parole, guaranteeing the rights of death-row inmates and disclosing the rules on when to carry out executions.

The proposal also said the temporary legislation should not specify the duration of the unilateral moratorium. Capital punishment should not resume until there is sufficient public debate on the issue that culminates in a decision on whether to abolish or maintain the system, it said.

Takeshi Kaneko, head of the federation panel, said he does not believe the new proposals will directly lead to abolition of the death penalty.

"The federation agreed to the proposals with the knowledge that members are split on the issue," he said. "The main aim is to try to discuss the current death penalty system in a calm environment by temporarily suspending execution of the sentences."


Death penalty panel
Lawmakers opposed to the death penalty will submit to next year's Diet session a bill to establish an ad hoc commission to debate the abolishment of capital punishment, it was learned Friday.
The Diet Member's League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty hopes the panel will serve a similar purpose to one formed years earlier to consider brain death and organ transplant issues, helping to pave the way for the legalization of transplants from brain-dead donors, sources said.

The abolitionist group, headed by former Liberal Democratic Party policy chief Shizuka Kamei, will also seek Penal Code revisions to create a new penalty for serious offenders.

The Japan Times: Nov. 24, 2002
(C) All rights reserved

読売 2002/11/24

死刑廃止推進議連、無期刑強化の法案準備

　超党派の「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（会長・亀井静香自民党前政調会長）が、死刑制度を当面存続させたまま、現行の無期刑を強化する刑法改正案を来年の通常国会に議員立法で提出し、成立させる準備を進めている。

　最短１０年での仮出獄が認められている現行の無期刑のほかに、仮出獄を認めない「終身刑」の導入や、２０―３０年以上服役しないと仮出獄を認めない「特別無期刑」（仮称）の創設を検討しているものだ。犯罪被害者家族の支援を拡大するための法整備も進める方針。また、同議連内には、将来的な死刑廃止を議論するため、政府内に「死刑臨時調査会」（仮称）の設置を求める意見も出ている。

共同 2002/11/23

終身刑導入でシンポ　死刑廃止の市民団体

国会議員や学者、弁護士らでつくる市民団体「死刑廃止フォーラム９０」が２３日、東京都新宿区で終身刑の導入の是非を問うシンポジウムを開き、賛否両論の意見を戦わせた。明治大の菊田幸一教授は、日弁連が死刑執行停止法制定を提言し、「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」が終身刑を含めさまざまな案を示していることに触れ「大変ありがたいことだと感激している」と話した。その上で「今は終身刑の残虐性などを論じるときではなく、一歩進むことが大切。終身刑ができれば死刑にこだわらない人も多く、あえて導入することで世論の支持を得ることが死刑廃止につながる」と述べた。

Kyodo News 2002/11/23

Moratorium on death penalty sought

Saturday, November 23, 2002
TOKYO - The Japan Federation of Bar Associations, Japan's largest bar organization, is to propose a legal moratorium on executions, the first time it has explicitly adopted a position against the death penalty, group officials said Friday.

The policy, adopted by the group's executive board members, comes as concerns continue over the deterrent value of capital punishment and the possibility of putting innocent people to death. (Kyodo News)

東京 2002/11/23

日弁連　死刑執行停止を提言

　日本弁護士連合会（本林徹会長）は二十二日、現行の死刑制度が改善されるまでの一定期間、死刑執行を一律に停止する「死刑執行停止法」の制定を柱とした提言をまとめた。日弁連は内部で意見が対立し、これまで組織としての立場を明確に示してこなかった。超党派の国会議員でつくる「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（亀井静香会長）とともに来年度以降の立法化を目指す。

　死刑執行停止法は時限立法で、停止期間は「死刑制度の抜本的な検討・見直し、国民的議論がなされるのに必要な相当期間」とされた。五年、十年といった年数を設定する案と、「一定の改善がなされるまで」として期間を定めない案が併記されている。

　死刑の停止期間に政府が死刑に関連する情報を最大限開示したり、国会に特別委員会、政府部内に臨時調査会を設置したりする。その上で死刑の存廃について合意形成を図るとしている。日弁連によると、同法は「死刑廃止」を目的とするものではなく、「見直しのうえで死刑制度を存続し、執行を再開する場合も考えられる」としている。

　提言では、死刑制度の問題点として（１）四件の死刑確定再審無罪事件などがあり、誤判の可能性を否定できない（２）犯罪抑止効果が科学的に証明されていない−などを挙げている。

毎日 2002/11/22

死刑制度：
執行停止法の制定などを提唱　日弁連


　日本弁護士連合会（本林徹会長）は２２日の理事会で「死刑制度問題に関する提言」を採択し、死刑の執行を一定期間停止する時限立法（死刑執行停止法）の制定などを提唱した。「死刑制度の改善が図られ、制度存廃について国民的議論が尽くされるまで、死刑の執行は許されない」としている。

　日弁連が組織として死刑制度について提言するのは初めて。来年の通常国会に「死刑臨調設置法案（仮称）」などの提出を目指す「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（亀井静香会長）にも影響を与えそうだ。

　提言は、時限立法で死刑執行が停止される間、▽政府は死刑に関連する情報を最大限開示する▽衆参両院に特別委員会を設置するか、政府内に臨時調査会を設置する――などして、死刑制度の存廃で合意形成を図るべきだと主張している。

　現行の死刑制度については「誤判防止の制度が欠如し、死刑に直面する人の権利保障も十分でない。抜本的な改善がなされない以上、死刑の執行は許されない事態にある」との認識を示した。

　提言には、日弁連として▽死刑に代わる最高刑について提言する▽犯罪被害者・遺族に対する支援・権利確立に関する取り組みを推進する――ことなども盛り込んだ。

　日弁連内部には死刑制度の存続について賛否両論があり、死刑問題についての態度表明を先送りしてきた。日弁連の金子武嗣・死刑制度対策連絡協議会座長は「議連の動きなどもあり、日弁連としてもスタンスを明らかにする必要が生じた」と話している。　【森本英彦】

共同 2002/11/22

死刑執行停止を提言　日弁連が初の方針


日弁連（本林徹会長）は２２日、理事会を開き、現行の死刑制度について冤罪防止策が確立されず犯罪抑止効果も証明されてない中で国民的論議が不十分なまま維持することは許されないとして、死刑執行停止法要綱案を作成し、死刑の執行を停止する時限立法の制定を提言していく方針を決めた。

死刑制度の存廃をめぐっては、日弁連内部でも意見が対立し、これまで組織としての立場が明確に示されたことはなかった。執行停止という経過的措置だが、日弁連が明確な方針を打ち出すのは初めて。

提言は、日弁連の死刑制度問題対策連絡協議会（金子武嗣座長）が理事会に提案。国際的に死刑廃止国が存置国を上回る情勢にあると指摘。現行制度について（１）死刑確定事件で４件の再審無罪が存在し誤判の危険性は否定できない（２）犯罪抑止効果が科学的に証明されていない（３）残虐性を否定できない−−を問題点として挙げた。

さらに容認が約８０％とした昨年の政府の世論調査を、死刑に関する十分な情報を公開せずに実施したと批判。被害者救済も死刑だけで解決できる問題ではなく支援体制の確立により報復感情が緩和される可能性もあるとしている。

その上で、誤判防止に向けた容疑者段階での国選弁護人制度や死刑判決の裁判官全員一致制の導入のほか、終身刑など死刑に代わる最高刑の検討や死刑確定者への十分な人権保障、被害者対策の確立、執行基準の情報公開が欠かせないと強調。

具体的な期間は明示せず、現行制度の問題点に対する改善措置が取られ、十分な国民的議論を経て合意が形成され存廃が決まるまでの間、立法により死刑の執行を一律に停止する必要があるとしている。
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
執行停止法の要綱案要旨

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

　日弁連が２２日、理事会で提言を決めた死刑執行停止法要綱案の要旨は次の通り。

　【目的】この法律は、死刑制度の問題状況にかんがみ、その存廃を含む抜本的な検討、見直しを行うため一定期間、死刑確定者に対する死刑の執行を停止するとともに、その間、政府・国会などの行うべき課題を定め、刑事司法制度の改善、基本的人権の増進を図る。

　【死刑執行の停止】政府は目的を達成するため、一定期間、死刑確定者に対する死刑執行を停止する。

　【停止期間中の政府・国会の行うべき課題】（１）政府は死刑に関連する情報を最大限開示する。（２）衆参両院に特別委員会を、政府部内に臨時調査会を設置するなどし（１）各国の動向（２）死刑の犯罪抑止力（３）死刑に代わる最高刑（４）被害者支援（５）死刑確定者の処遇−などの問題について検討・審議し、死刑制度の存廃について合意形成を図り、結論を得て改善を実施する。

　【死刑の執行停止期間】課題の検討、国民的議論に必要な相当期間とする。

朝日 2002/11/22

日弁連、死刑の一時執行停止などを提言

　日本弁護士連合会は２２日の理事会で「死刑制度問題に関する提言」を採択した。「情報がほとんど公開されず、死刑確定者の人権保障の面でも批判がある現行制度下の死刑執行は、もはや許されない」との立場だ。改善するまでの一定期間、死刑執行を停止する時限的な「死刑執行停止法」の制定や、国民的議論を尽くすため国会か政府に臨時調査会などを設置することを盛り込んでいる。
　日弁連が死刑制度について提言するのは初めて。死刑に代わって国民的合意の得られる最高刑や、死刑と現行の無期懲役刑との格差を埋める新たな刑の創設などについても調査・研究が必要だと提言した。

　日弁連内には死刑廃止をめぐって賛否両論があり、これまでは制度に対する主張を避けて「消極的死刑容認」の立場を取ってきた。

　しかし、死刑を廃止・執行停止する国が多数となる国際的な潮流や、超党派の「死刑廃止議員連盟」（亀井静香会長）が来年の法案提出に向け動きを活発化していることを受け、制度の存廃も含めて制度のあり方について議論を尽くすべきだとの点でまとまった。 (20:25)

Mainichi Daily News 2002/11/21

Group moves to abolish death penalty

A parliamentary league demanding the abolition of death penalty is poised to take action to initiate full-scale discussions in the Diet on the issue, the Mainichi has learned Thursday.

The nonpartisan body, headed by former Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) chief policymaker Shizuka Kamei and comprising of 121 legislators, is poised to submit to the next Diet session a bill aimed at setting up a government panel on the issue. It will also simultaneously introduce a bill to revise the Penal Code that would discourage courts from handing down death sentences.

This will be the first time that the Diet has held full-scale discussions on the death penalty since 1956, when a bill aimed at abolishing capital punishment was submitted to the legislature but ended up being scrapped without being put to a vote.

Under the proposal made by the league, an ad hoc council on the death penalty would be established under the Cabinet and comprise of Diet members and experts on legal affairs among others.

The panel would conduct research on the situation in European and other countries that have abolished the capital punishment, interview experts and hold public hearings on the issue. Based on such research activities, the panel would hold in-depth discussions on the pros and cons of the death penalty.

The bill will clearly state that abolition of the death penalty is a world trend, and make it difficult to execute death-row inmates until the council is disbanded.

A bill aimed at amending the Penal Code will be based on a private proposal made by Toshiko Hamayotsu, a Komeito member of the House of Councillors and lawyer-turned politician.

While retaining the death penalty, the bill would establish a "special" indefinte prison term, under which prisoners could not be released on parole until they have spent 20 to 30 years behind bars. The clause is aimed at discouraging courts from handing down death sentences.

The parliamentary league worked out an outline of a bill last spring to revise the Penal Code that would do away with the death penalty while establishing a "heavy" indefinite imprisonment, under which prisoners serving such a prison term could never be released on parole.

However, it decided not to completely do away with the capital punishment in a compromise with a large number of LDP legislators, who have voiced stiff opposition to completely abolishing the death penalty.

Japan is under pressure to get scrap the death penalty. The Council of Europe is threatening to strip Japan and the United States of their observer status unless they implement a moratorium on the execution of death-row inmates. (Mainichi Shimbun, Nov. 21, 2002)

毎日 2002/11/21

＜死刑廃止＞「死刑臨調設置法案」提出へ　廃止議連　通常国会に

　「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（亀井静香会長、１２０人）は、「死刑臨調設置法案（仮称）」を来年の通常国会に提出する方針を固めた。脳死者からの臓器移植を法制化する際の「脳死臨調」をモデルに、国民的議論を巻き起こすのが狙い。当面の死刑執行停止を求めるための特別無期刑（仮称）を盛り込んだ刑法改正案と併せて、今国会中に法案の要綱案をまとめる意向だ。

　国会での本格的な死刑論議は、５６年に死刑廃止法案（廃案）が提出されて以来、半世紀ぶりになる。

　死刑臨時調査会（仮称）は内閣に置き、国会議員を含む有識者らで構成する。死刑を廃止している欧州各国などへの海外調査や、参考人聴取、公聴会などで死刑制度の是非について議論する。設立目的に死刑廃止が世界的な潮流であることを書き込み、設置期間中の死刑執行ができにくい内容にしたいという。

　また、同時に提出する刑法改正案については、メンバーの浜四津敏子参院議員（公明）の私案を軸にまとめる方向が固まった。死刑は存置したまま、死刑と現在の無期刑の間に、２０〜３０年間服役しなければ仮出獄を認めない特別無期刑（仮称）を新設する。死刑判決を減らすのが目的で、法施行後２年程度の死刑執行停止も付則として盛り込む方針。

　現在、両法案について内閣法制局と最終的な詰めの作業をしており、今月中にも最終決定する。

　同議連は今春、死刑を廃止し、仮出獄を認めない重無期刑を新設する刑法改正案（死刑廃止法案）の骨子をまとめた。しかし自民党を中心に死刑存置論が根強く、可決される可能性が低いことから方針を変えた。

　同議連には、江藤・亀井派を中心に２０人以上の自民党議員が所属している。ストレートな死刑廃止方針を転換することで、今後は亀井会長を中心に他派閥への働きかけを強めるとみられる。

　死刑廃止については、国際機関「欧州評議会」が、オブザーバー参加の日米両国に対して、死刑執行のモラトリアム（猶予）実施を求め、０２年中に進展がなければ、オブザーバー資格のはく奪を検討すると言明するなど、国際的な圧力がかかっている。　【伊藤正志】（毎日新聞）

時事 2002/11/21

死刑臨調、特別無期刑で法案＝廃止議連が通常国会提出へ

　超党派の国会議員でつくる「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（会長・亀井静香自民党前政調会長）は２１日、死刑臨時調査会（仮称）を設置するための法案を議員立法で次期通常国会に提出する方針を固めた。脳死者からの臓器移植を法制化した際の「臨時脳死及び臓器移植調査会」（脳死臨調）をモデルに、死刑廃止に向けた国民的な議論を巻き起こすのが狙い。また、死刑執行の停止に向け「特別無期刑」の創設のための刑法改正案と、犯罪被害者の救済法案も併せて提出したい考えだ。　（時事通信）

朝日 2002/08/28

●日本の死刑制度存廃論　欧州中心に廃止の潮流（私の視点・その後）
（朝日新聞東京本社発行　８月２８日付朝刊）

　　　　　　　　　　　
　死刑制度の存廃をめぐって、「私の視点」で議論が続いている。きっかけは、大島令子衆議院議員の「死刑、廃止しなければ人権後進国」（５月２７日付）との訴え。これに対し、多くの反論や意見が寄せられた。いま、日本の死刑制度を取り巻く状況はどうなっているのだろうか。（企画報道室・磯洋介）

　死刑制度で一番大きな変化は、国際環境だ。

　８９年にいわゆる「死刑廃止条約」が国連総会で採択されてから、死刑を廃止する国が徐々に増えた。アムネスティ・インターナショナルの調べでは、今年１月現在、存置国・地域８４に対し、廃止国・地域は欧州を中心に１１１と上回っている。

　先進国で死刑を残すのは、米国と日本だけだ。このため昨年６月、欧州評議会は日米両国に対し、「０３年１月１日までに死刑廃止に向けた具体的な進展がみられない場合、オブザーバー資格を見直す」と決議した。

　死刑問題に詳しい明治大学の菊田幸一教授は、「経済や軍事力で優位な日米に対し、欧州には人権や環境問題を外交交渉力にしたいという政治的意図はあるものの、死刑廃止はもはや世界の流れだ」と断言する。

　こうした見方に対し、法務省は、今年４月の国連人権委員会での死刑廃止決議が、賛成２５に対し、反対が２０、棄権が８あったことなどを挙げ、「死刑廃止が国際的に一致したといえる状況にはない」（北村篤・参事官）と反論。死刑の存廃についても、「各国における国民感情、犯罪情勢、刑事政策のあり方などを踏まえ、独自に決定すべきだ」（同）という従来の見解を変えていない。

　ただ、これまで比較的死刑存置国が多かったアジアでも、韓国では昨年１０月に過半数の国会議員によって死刑廃止法案が提出され、現在審議中だ。死刑の執行も金大中大統領が就任した９８年以来、ない。台湾でも昨年５月、法務大臣が０４年までに死刑を廃止する計画を発表している。

　総理府（当時）が９９年９月に行った世論調査では、７９％が死刑制度を支持すると答えているとはいえ、死刑廃止の国際潮流から日本だけが遠ざかる可能性がある。

　○浮上する執行停止制度

　死刑制度を支持する人の間でも、生命を奪う死刑と、１０年を経過すれば仮釈放が可能な無期刑に、大きな違いがあることを問題だと指摘する声は大きい。

　そこで、国会の超党派で組織する「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（会長・亀井静香氏）は、死刑の代替刑として、仮釈放を認めない終身刑を新たに設ける法案を検討して、来年の通常国会に提出する方針だ。

　ただ、この死刑に代わる終身刑については、死刑廃止論者からも「かえって残虐な刑罰だ」「重罰化の動きを加速する」との批判がある。　日弁連の死刑制度問題対策連絡協議会の座長を務めた柳重雄弁護士は、「日本の刑務所は閉鎖的で非人間的な扱いをする、と諸外国から批判されている。処遇を改善しないまま終身刑を導入すれば、かえって人道上問題になる」と指摘する。

　そうした中で浮上しているのが、死刑執行停止制度、いわゆるモラトリアムの採用だ。死刑制度そのものは維持しつつ、確定死刑判決を受けた者に対する死刑の執行を一律に停止する。その間に死刑制度について存廃も含めて国民的な議論をして見直すというのだ。

　死刑を廃止した多くの国が採用し、５月に来日した欧州評議会のメンバーもモラトリアムの導入を勧めた。死刑廃止議連の保坂展人事務局長（社民党）も、「幅広い国民的議論を巻き起こさないと、刑法の最高刑から死刑を除くのは難しい。耳の奥に残った」と言う。

　日弁連でも現在、死刑執行停止法案をつくり、政府内に臨時調査会などを設けて死刑制度の存廃について合意形成するよう提言できないか、内部で検討している。

　今後、日本でも死刑制度の存廃が大きな社会的、政治的課題になる可能性が高い。



　◇読者の意見から　肉親が被害者でも反対か／罪の自覚ないまま抹殺して何になる

　「私の視点」に寄せられた意見では、当初、死刑廃止論に反発する声が多かった。しかし、次第に死刑廃止に理解を示す意見も増えている。

　多かったのは、大島議員が死刑囚の首の写真を撮って法相に「死刑は残虐だ」と訴えた行為に対して、「（大島氏は）殺害された被害者の遺体はご覧になったのでしょうか」（４１歳、勤務医）、「自分の親や子供が被害者になった場合でも、死刑は反対であろうか」（６１歳、女性）といった応報感情に基づく反発だ。

　死刑制度に対しても、「正義を実現するためには、（国家に）一元化された暴力装置が必要」（３８歳、塾講師）、「あだ討ち時代に戻ることはできないので、法治国家としての処罰は必要」（５８歳、公務員）と肯定する。

　死刑制度を必要としない社会は理想だが、次々と起こる凶悪事件に、どうしても極刑を望む心理は強いようだ。

　逆に、死刑制度の廃止に賛成する人は、国家による「殺人」に疑問を感じ、誤判や冤罪の可能性を指摘する。

　「死刑制度を廃止しなくてはならないと思う最大の理由が、国家に市民の生殺与奪権を与えてはならないことだ」（４９歳、ＮＰＯ職員）。「人が裁判を行う以上、冤罪の危険性を完全に除去するのは不可能。（死刑に賛成の人は）仮に自分の身内が冤罪で死刑になっても受け入れられるのか」（２７歳、大学院生）

　一方で、そもそも「死」は刑罰になるのか、という意見もあった。横浜市に住む３２歳の幼稚園教諭は、「自らの罪すら理解していない犯罪者を、社会が抹殺したところで何になるのか。たとえ何十年かかろうと罪を理解させることが、刑として有効だと思う」。

　＜死刑制度をめぐる最近の主な動き＞
　１９８９年　国連で死刑廃止条約を採択（９１年発効、日本は米国、中国などと反対）
　　　９３年　後藤田法相、３年４カ月ぶりに死刑執行を再開
　　　　　　　国連人権規約委員会が死刑廃止を勧告
　　　９４年　超党派の国会議員による「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」が発足
　　　９６年　ロシアが欧州議会に加盟するため、死刑執行を停止
　　　９９年　総理府の世論調査で、「死刑もやむを得ない」が７９％と戦後最高。オウム事件の影響か
　２００１年　欧州評議会が日米に対し、「死刑廃止に進展がなければオブザーバー資格を見直す」と決議
　　　　　　　米連邦議会に死刑執行停止法案が提出される
　　　０２年　死刑廃止議連が死刑廃止法案の骨子を発表
　　　　　　　欧州評議会と死刑廃止議連が、国会議員会館で司法人権セミナーを開く

Japan Times 2002/11/05

EDITORIAL

Extensive debate on the Constitution

A Lower House constitutional research panel last week released an interim report summarizing nearly three years of its discussions. The voluminous document covers a wide range of subjects, including the Emperor system, roles of the Self-Defense Forces and basic human rights. However, it leaves open the question of whether or how the Constitution should be amended.
The report objectively states, item by item, all views expressed by its members and outside experts. It offers no conclusion on any item. However, views calling for change take up more space than those supporting the status quo. This indicates that opinion is growing in favor of revising the national charter, which has never been amended since it was established in 1947.

The summary includes, for example, comments supporting the popular election of a prime minister and introduction of a constitutional court. It also refers to a need for "new human rights," such as the right to a clean environment. Most significant, the war-renouncing Article 9 is covered more extensively than any other subject, with members who favor a revision outnumbering those who oppose it.

The growing concern for constitutional reform reflects some of the historic changes that have occurred here and abroad over the past half century. Particularly, the end of the Cold War has taken the steam out of the rigid standoff between antirevision and prorevision schools and introduced a good measure of flexibility into the debate.

The summary on Article 9, presented under the heading "Security and International Cooperation," includes a statement calling for a revision to allow the SDF to participate in U.N.-organized or multinational forces. Another statement says this controversial article is now out of touch with reality. There are also prominent references to specific issues such as SDF response to foreign attacks and a collective security system. The question that remains is how to meet real security needs while maintaining the pacifist principles of the Constitution.

Opinion on the Emperor system is also divided. The majority view, however, embraces the current status of the Emperor as "the symbol of the state and of the unity of the people." Some believe that Article 1 should be rewritten to make the Emperor the head of state. There is also a view that a woman should be allowed to ascend the Chrysanthemum Throne.

It is notable that the report includes a number of new subjects that are not covered by the present Constitution. One is the popular election of a prime minister. This will promote direct democracy, but opponents and skeptics say it could conflict with the Emperor's status. They also fear it might increase the risks of populism.

Another involves "new human rights," such as privacy rights, the right to live in a clean environment, the right to know the truth, the right to request disclosure of government-held data, and the right to access information networks. However, opinion is split on whether to state these "new values" in the Constitution.

There are also pros and cons on a variety of other issues, such as abolition of the death penalty, introduction of an optional separate-name system for couples, easing of the eligibility requirements for foreigners' acquisition of Japanese nationality and allowing long-term foreign residents to participate in local public elections.

Creating a constitutional court is also a new topic of discussion -- an idea that reflects a view that the Supreme Court has tended to avoid exercising its right to examine cases involving possible violations of the Constitution. Promoting local autonomy -- by creating a new federal system, for example -- is also an important item in the report.

It is welcome that the issue of constitutional reform, a taboo for much of the postwar period, is beginning to attract wider attention. The Diet began a formal debate in January 2000 when a research panel was created in both chambers. Credit goes to the 50-member Lower House panel for doing such an exhaustive study.

It appears, however, that there is as yet not much enthusiasm for reform, not only among the panel members but also among Diet members in general. Under the circumstances, the public also remains unenthusiastic. Perhaps it will take some drastic change in the domestic or international situation to create a national consensus for a constitutional revision.

The Lower House research commission has until 2005 to complete a final report. As things stand, there is no telling how the debate will end. But if it fails to produce any constructive conclusion, or something close to it, the goal of bringing the Constitution more in line with reality will remain as elusive as ever.

Japan Times 2002/10/04

HARD JUSTICE

TIME IS RIPE
Diet group against death penalty to make its move

Last of two parts

By KAHO SHIMIZU
Staff writer

The time has arrived for a group of 122 lawmakers seeking to abolish the death penalty to make their move and put their case before the Diet.
Amid mounting international pressure, the nonpartisan group is preparing a bill to drop capital punishment from the Criminal Code.


(Photo) Justice Minister Mayumi Moriyama (center) meets members of a Diet group opposing capital punishment at her office in Tokyo on Sept. 18 as they lodge an official protest over two executions carried out earlier that day.

The group hopes to have the bill ready before the next ordinary Diet session convenes in January. It would be the first such move since 1956, when Upper House members made a similar proposal in vain.

"We have urged the Justice Ministry many times to halt executions and raised the issue 15 times in the Diet, but nothing has changed," said Nobuto Hosaka, a Social Democratic Party lawmaker and secretary general of the nonpartisan lawmaker group.

According to the group, the ministry has stuck to its guns, using the rationale that it is legally bound to execute condemned killers.


The life sentence
The group is currently discussing two draft bills from which they hope to craft legislation to submit to the Diet.
One is to revise the Criminal Code to replace the death penalty with a life sentence either without parole or without the possibility of parole until after 30 years behind bars.

Because convicts serving life prison terms can currently be subject to parole after 10 years, people fear that if capital punishment is abolished, criminals who have committed heinous crimes might be allowed back on the streets in that time frame.

According to the Justice Ministry, convicts paroled in 1999 after serving a life sentence had spent an average of about 21 years behind bars, compared with about 16 years for 1977 parolees.

Even though the data show prison terms in recent years have gotten longer, it is sill widely acknowledged that a life term differs little from a limited prison term. Thus the idea of a life sentence without parole.

However, some members in the Diet group say that if such a term is introduced, it could be crueler than hanging because it removes any hope prisoners may have of regaining their freedom.

It is extremely rare for death-row inmates to obtain a reduced sentence or a pardon; the last time this occurred was in 1975.

Thus, amendments to the Amnesty Law as well as other laws are also being considered to give convicts an opportunity to apply for leniency. In the draft bill, the Diet members are mulling 20 years as the minimum prison term before a convict can apply for leniency.

If it is granted, then even an extended life sentence would include the current life term's parole eligibility after 10 years, effectively increasing the minimum time behind bars to 30 years for criminals.


Sparking debate
The other draft bill under consideration is proposed by Toshiko Hamayotsu, deputy head of the Diet group and a New Komeito member.
It seeks similar but more moderate steps.

Hamayotsu sees the immediate abolishment of the death penalty as facing huge opposition in the Diet. She is suggesting that the group first seek to spark serious public debate on the issue.

While retaining capital punishment in the Criminal Code, Hamayotsu's plan aims to create a new penalty that does not allow parole unless a criminal serves either 20 or 30 years.

According to Hamayotsu, a lawyer before entering politics, the huge disparity between the severity of the death sentence and the current life sentence poses a dilemma for judges.

The proposed life sentence without parole would lessen the gap, she said, noting that an additional clause institutionalizing a moratorium on executions for two years would be included. During this period, the nation could work toward reaching a conclusion on whether to keep capital punishment on the books, she said.


Moving forward with care
The Diet group is trying to ready the bill as soon as possible, but they are also well aware they have to advance the argument with the greatest care. If the bill is scrapped, it would probably take decades to get the momentum rolling again.
At the same time, the group also plans to submit a bill to provide comprehensive support for people victimized by crime and their families, believing Japan has long lacked such a system.

With the two bills, the group aims to create a system whereby both death-row inmates' and crime victims' rights are protected.

"We are trying to figure out what is best and what is most convincing for as many people as possible," Hosaka of the Diet group said.

According to the Council of Europe, an international body created in 1949 to unite Europe around shared principles, including respect for human rights, 111 countries worldwide have abolished or have a de facto moratorium on capital punishment. As of January, 84 nations still had capital punishment.

In 1991, a U.N. convention took effect aimed at abolishing capital punishment.

Japan and the United States are now the only members of the Group of Eight that still carry out executions.

The two countries have observer status at the Council of Europe, but now that is at stake.

The 43 member countries of the European body adopted a resolution in June 2001 to urge Japan and the U.S. to abolish or at least halt executions.

According to the resolution, if no significant progress is made by January each could lose their status.

A movement in South Korea threatens to get the jump on Japan. A bill to abolish capital punishment was brought to its legislature by 155 lawmakers last October.

South Korean lawmaker Chyung Dai Chul, who took the lead in championing the bill, said in May at a seminar in Tokyo he is confident it will be passed because supporters account for a majority in the 273-member legislature.

No execution has been carried out in South Korea since 1998, the year Kim Dae Jung became president.

The story of Kim, who as a democracy advocate in the 1970s was abducted from a Tokyo hotel by South Korean agents, tried in his country and sentenced to death for sedition, and later freed to take up exile in the United States, has added public momentum to the drive to scrap capital punishment.


Business as usual
Despite the global trend, Japan's judicial authorities have not budged.
"In Japan, there is an expression of apology 'shinde wabiru' (to atone for one's crime by killing oneself), which I think shows our own view toward crimes," Justice Minister Mayumi Moriyama said at the May Tokyo conference, arguing that the divergent views on capital punishment in Japan and Europe stem from cultural differences.

Most Japanese support the death penalty, Moriyama stressed, citing public opinion polls conducted by the government.

However, Chyung, who said he is willing to devote himself to support the campaign to abolish capital punishment in Japan, believes public opinion may change if people are better informed.

He is encouraging Japanese lawmakers to convince the public that the death penalty is a barbaric form of punishment, something a modern civilized nation should not condone.


Forging public opinion
European delegates who visited Japan for a Tokyo conference earlier this year said the death penalty is a violation of the basic human right to life.
Nevertheless, European opponents of capital punishment said they observe little public debate on the issue in Japan, citing this is an example of where politicians must lead -- and not follow -- public opinion.

Since its foundation in 1994, the Diet group opposed to capital punishment has primarily focused on either urging the Justice Ministry to halt executions or demanding that it disclose information regarding capital punishment, such as the names of those who are hanged and the execution procedures.

Believing the time is ripe to move on, Hosaka said the group now aims to raise public awareness on the issue while continuing to discuss it with other parties, including the Japan Federation of Bar Associations, experts who specialize in the penal system, and nongovernmental organizations.

Group members are also scheduled to meet their counterparts in a visit to South Korea in November.

Hosaka boasts of the increasing number of members in the Diet group, believing they will soon total 200.

"We must continue debating and studying the issue to strengthen our leverage to realize an end to the death penalty."

Japan Times 2002/10/04

INNOCENT PEOPLE SENT TO GALLOWS
Kamei slams death penalty risk

By KAHO SHIMIZU
Staff writer

Former Liberal Democratic Party policy chief Shizuka Kamei's earlier 15-year stint as a senior officer in the National Police Agency convinced him of the possibility that not everyone who is sentenced to hang is guilty.

(Photo) Shizuka Kamei

Suspects tend to break down during intense police interrogations and eventually admit to whatever investigators claim, the veteran lawmaker and LDP heavyweight said.

"When I was in command of investigations, I saw this many times, almost getting some suspects wrongly accused," said Kamei, 65, who heads a nonpartisan group of 122 Diet members opposing the death penalty.

Kamei is not talking about forced confessions per se, but an interrogation pattern under which investigators grill a suspect based on a predetermined theory. The suspect is gradually driven into an unavoidable corner, he said.

Under the criminal justice system, prosecutors and judges have long placed too much importance on confessions, he said, and judges put too much faith in prosecutors.

"Even if accused murderers deny in court what they 'confessed' to during interrogations, judges tend to attach importance to the confessions instead of the defendants' testimony in court," Kamei said, emphasizing there is always the risk that innocent people are sent to death row.

For the sake of maintaining a safe society, Kamei asked, is it justifiable to potentially put innocent lives at risk?

"I believe public safety would not be undermined if the death penalty was abolished," he said.

Kamei is confident a majority of the 727-member Diet would support a bill to abolish capital punishment.

"I believe there are many lawmakers who support the introduction of life prison terms without the possibility of parole as a replacement for capital punishment," although some may oppose dropping the death penalty right away, Kamei said.

The nonpartisan group of lawmakers to which he has belonged since it was founded in 1994 has been discussing alternatives to capital punishment. Life in prison without parole is probably the key.

The group started with 117 members but dropped to about 50 members following the series of heinous crimes committed by Aum Shinrikyo in the mid-1990s. Membership increased to 122 after Kamei assumed the helm, accelerating the movement toward submitting the bill to the Diet.

The possibility that innocent people could be put to death is not the only reason why Kamei strongly opposes capital punishment.

Even if guilt is not in doubt, Kamei still believes the state should not have the right to kill in the name of justice.

Although it is only natural that people victimized by crime seek vengeance through the courts, they must get over their hatred and learn to forgive criminals to end the chain of hostility, he said.

When a nation legitimizes capital punishment, this sends the message that killing is an acceptable way to resolve social problems, and that runs contrary to the government's condemnation of violence and advocacy of world peace, Kamei said.

"We must stop avenging and try to come to a nonviolent settlement instead," Kamei stressed. "Retaliating will only do our civilization harm."

Good and evil coexist in humans, he said, noting that even those who have committed violent crimes can be rehabilitated.

"Prisons are supposed to be places not only for punishment, but also for rehabilitating convicts so they can eventually re-enter society," Kamei said, adding that time, tolerance and patience is needed for rehabilitating criminals, especially the unrepentant.

Kamei believes that in many cases, perpetrators of heinous crimes are a product of society, including family and economic circumstances.

"Have you ever experienced the emotion of wanting to kill someone? Well, I have," he said, adding that anyone could be put in abnormal circumstances that lead them to commit a crime.

That is why he believes society as a whole must make the effort to give murderers another chance instead of just putting them to death.

"If a country doesn't protect lives and have respect for human dignity, it can't have a bright future," he said.

Japan Times 2002/10/03

HARD JUSTICE

MINISTRY SECRECY DRAWS SPOTLIGHT
Even victimized divided on death penalty

First of two parts

By KAHO SHIMIZU
Staff writer

Masaharu Harada was stunned when he found out that the man who murdered his younger brother had been executed on Dec. 27 in Nagoya.
He wondered why authorities felt they had to kill such a remorseful man.

Toshihiko Hasegawa was one of two convicts hanged in December. He was convicted of killing Harada's brother and two other people in a murder-for-insurance scheme between 1979 and 1983. His death sentence was finalized in 1993.

Harada had petitioned the Justice Ministry on Hasegawa's behalf to stay his execution. He believed letting Hasegawa live so he could express remorse was the only way for him to atone for his crime.

Despite the repeated entreaties, the ministry did not hesitate to single Hasegawa out for execution from dozens of death-row inmates nationwide.

At the end of December, there were 56 people on death row, according to the Justice Ministry.

The ministry did not explain why Hasegawa was chosen or why executions were carried out on that day, stating it is not permitted to discuss individual cases.

The ministry instead cited public opinion in support of the death penalty to justify its actions.

The December hangings raised questions about the rationale behind executions, including whether putting perpetrators to death really brings closure or satisfaction to the victims' relatives, or whether public opinion should be cited to justify capital punishment.

"The execution didn't help (ease the pain of) our family," Harada said.

When he initially learned of Hasegawa's arrest, he wanted his brother's killer to be put to death.

But having received more than 100 letters of repentance from the prisoner, Harada eventually changed his mind.

"I got Hasegawa's first letter from prison immediately after the first trial session in 1984," he recalled.

Although Harada did not reply for a long time, Hasegawa kept writing, reiterating his remorse and sometimes enclosing pictures he had drawn in prison, including a self-portrait.

"Every letter was filled with words of apology and hope for the family's best," Harada explained.

After finally replying in 1993, Harada visited his brother's killer in prison later that year.

"Many years had passed and I was calm enough to face everything (about the murder) by then," he said, adding that it is impossible to relate how grateful Hasegawa looked upon receiving this visit.

During their 20-minute meeting, Hasegawa directly apologized for his actions.

Harada said, however, that although he had thought long and hard about what he would say at that moment, he found himself at a loss for words when it finally arrived.

They skirted the actual murder itself, talking instead about the well-being of Harada's family and about Hasegawa's life in prison.

Hasegawa exhausted the appeals process and his death sentence was finalized soon afterward, however, and tightened restrictions on communication between death-row inmates and the outside world limited Harada's contact with him.

After pressuring prison officials, Harada was granted three more meetings with Hasegawa before these visits were eventually terminated in 1995.

"The prison officials rejected my repeated requests, saying I could not see him because they wanted to keep Hasegawa mentally stable," Harada said.

Six years later, Harada attended Hasegawa's wake.

Harada feels that despite having met Hasegawa four times, they never had time to address the murder head-on as he would have liked.

He said the execution left him feeling empty.

"Attempts to justify capital punishment by citing the feelings of the victims' families do not sit well with me," he said.


The flip-side of the coin
Perhaps few people who have been victimized by crime would agree with Harada, however.
Hiroshi Motomura, whose wife and 11-month-old daughter were strangled in their Yamaguchi Prefecture home by a teenager who tried to rape the wife in 1999, said Hasegawa's execution was unavoidable.

"No matter how remorseful the convict seems, the condemned should be punished in accordance with the sentence meted out," Motomura said.

The death sentence should not be altered by requests from victims' families, he added.

Although prosecutors had demanded the death penalty for the youth who at age 18 killed Motomura's family, he was sentenced to life in prison by the Yamaguchi District Court.

Motomura felt let down by this ruling.

The sentence was upheld in March by the Hiroshima High Court, which said the killer had repented and could be rehabilitated.

The case is now before the Supreme Court, where prosecutors are again demanding the death penalty. The defendant's name has been withheld because he was a minor at the time of the crime.

During the trial, the killer's upbringing in a tough environment and remorse over the killings took center stage, according to Motomura.

Motomura believes, however, that arguing over something no one can be sure of is pointless. He believes court rulings should be dictated solely by the Criminal Code.

When convicts express remorse, it is impossible to gauge if they are sincere, he said, adding no one really knows if it is possible to rehabilitate a criminal.

According to the Justice Ministry, more than 36 percent of people who commit crimes became repeat offenders in 2001.

"All I can tell you is that the person who killed my wife and daughter wrote to his friend saying that he won" after the district court rejected prosecutors' demands for the death penalty and sentenced him to life, Motomura said.

Opponents of capital punishment want the public's views examined more carefully.

Although the Justice Ministry cites a public support rate of 79.3 percent for the death penalty, based on its latest poll, as a principal reason for maintaining capital punishment, many experts say opinion polls should not be used to justify the practice.

They argue that surveys can contain leading questions and respondents may lack adequate information about the death penalty.

In the latest survey conducted by the government, in 1999, the question and response options were:

Which of the following opinions do you agree with?

I think the death penalty should be abolished under all circumstances.

I think the death penalty is necessary in some cases.

I cannot decide which to choose.

"When respondents are not sure of their stance toward the 'judicial killing system,' it is natural for them to go for the moderate answer -- the second one," said lawyer Mitsuhiro Wada, a member of Amnesty International Japan, the Tokyo branch of the international human rights group.

No matter what the crime was, executions violate basic human rights, he said, and by killing murderers, the state is merely replicating their actions.

Some experts also say opinion poll results reflect the public's general lack of information regarding the death penalty.

"People have little access to information about the capital punishment system in Japan," Wada said, noting there is little public debate on the issue.

The Justice Ministry does not announce its execution plans, and merely discloses how many hangings took place after the fact.

The government doesn't even disclose the names of the executed, leaving nongovernmental organizations that oppose the death penalty to do so after they have conducted their own investigations.

"The government should not use the results of public opinion polls to defend the death penalty," Wada said, adding that authorities should first disclose all information necessary to raise public awareness.

The government should only cite public opinion to defend its position after extensive public debate on the issue has taken place, Wada argued.


Information clampdown
Commenting on the ministry's secretive policy, Justice Minister Mayumi Moriyama told a news conference on Dec. 28, "It is the ministry's practice since 1998, and I think that is the best we can do at present.
"Generally speaking, the ministry goes over all sorts of relevant documents and considers various angles before deciding whether it is appropriate to execute certain convicts," she said, adding the justice minister then gives the final go-ahead.

Death penalty foes suspect the Justice Ministry chooses who dies at random.

Yuji Ogawara, a Tokyo-based lawyer who has been studying the issue for nearly 15 years, said, "Japan is a democratic country, which means that we, the nation, must know what the government is doing.

"It's not that hangings are carried out by someone in some place not connected with our daily lives. Every one of us in effect gives tacit approval."


Legislative maneuvers
Ogawara hopes public debate will be triggered by a group of 122 Diet members calling for abolition of the death penalty.
The group is led by Shizuka Kamei, former policy chief of the Liberal Democratic Party. These lawmakers are currently preparing a bill that would put an end to capital punishment in the near future.

Although he is a firm foe of the death penalty, Ogawara welcomes arguments by the proponents, believing any argument will help provoke further debate.

Ogawara believes raising public awareness is the only way to bring problems related to capital punishment to the surface. Harada and Motomura both share this view.

Harada has been lecturing across the country about the death penalty ever since he realized he did not want his brother's killer to hang.

"I feel that every audience I face knows nothing about the death penalty," Harada said.

His accounts of his experiences with Hasegawa fuel debate among those present, he said.

Motomura, who is convinced that the man who killed his family deserves to die, agrees people should learn more about Japan's capital punishment system. To this end, he believes the government should disclose death-row convicts' last words.

He believes this would help the public gain greater awareness of the consequences of crime for criminals as well as their victims.

"We must at least make society aware of the judicial killing system" in order to search for ways to prevent future crime, Motomura said.

Japan Times 2002/10/03

Death row is not knowing when
Inmates wake up every day wondering if it's their last

By KAHO SHIMIZU
Staff writer

It is not uncommon in Japan for people convicted of brutal, often notorious, murders to be sentenced to hang.
But the public knows little about what lies in store for death-row inmates after their sentences are finalized, while the inmates themselves never know from then on which day will be their last. They thus bear the stress of having to face the gallows without notice -- and without being afforded the opportunity to bid anyone farewell.

This scenario has prompted experts to raise questions about their treatment.

"Conditions on death row are very harsh," the mother of a man facing execution at Tokyo Detention House told an international conference on capital punishment in Tokyo earlier this year.

The mother, who declined to be named, said her son's sentence was finalized by the Supreme Court last year after 10 years of trial at the district, high and top court levels.

Like other death-row inmates, her son is in solitary confinement, she said.

He was convicted of murdering a family of four during a burglary in Ichikawa, Chiba Prefecture, in 1992, when he was a minor.

The mother said his contact with the outside world has been more restricted since his sentence was finalized.

Death-row convicts are only allowed to meet close relatives and attorneys working on an appeal -- with guards present.

Every letter written or received by convicts is screened by authorities.

According to the inmate's mother, if any part of a letter written by her son is deemed inappropriate, he is forced to rewrite that portion, often to the point that the original meaning is lost.

The Japan Federation of Bar Associations said such limits on communication hinder a convict's pursuit of an appeal or retrial.

And then there is the agony of not knowing when the fateful day will come.

"Every time I visit my son, I think today might be the last time I see him," the mother said, noting that neither the family, the lawyer nor the convict will be notified in advance of the execution day. "It's like the state is testing my son's patience, forcing him to lose control and go mad."

Justice Ministry officials claim, however, there is no other choice.

"Besides physically restraining convicts so they cannot escape, an important goal in confining them is to make them accept the sentence and face their own death calmly," said Jun Aoyama of the ministry's Corrections Bureau.

"But prisoners awaiting execution are always in a psychologically unstable state, and every little thing can cause trouble," he added.

Every regulation restricting the prisoners' communications helps keep their mental state steady, he said.

"As long as the country sanctions capital punishment, it is our duty to make sure that the criminals atone for their crime."


The hangman's stress
The brutality of executions goes beyond just the killing of inmates, according to Social Democratic Party lawmaker Reiko Oshima, who is a member of a nonpartisan group of Diet members opposed to capital punishment.
Prison officers also bear a psychological burden when they carry out the sentence, she said.

"Article 36 of the Constitution stipulates that the infliction of torture by any public officer and cruel punishment is forbidden," she said, noting it is unconstitutional for the government to require that prison officers carry out executions.

What surprised her most is that neither recruitment advertisements nor internal rules for prison officers stipulate that their duties include carrying out executions.

Prison guard recruitment ads in fact only show the bright side of their job and make no mention of the gallows. Internal regulations also decline to mention that carrying out executions is one of a prison guard's duties.

The bar federation said there are reports about wardens suffering psychological disorders after witnessing or carrying out hangings.

Lawyer Yoshihiro Yasuda, a leading campaigner against capital punishment, said, "I have heard of a former prison officer bursting into tears as he related his experience of witnessing executions."

Justice Ministry gag orders keep them from relating such horrors to the public, he added.

"This kind of business is not something that you do openly," ministry official Aoyama said.

"They (prison officers) may have various feelings (about carrying out executions), but everyone in the prison knows that executions are a part of their job."

ニューズウィーク日本版 2002/08/07

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------Newsweek
ON JAPAN
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
連載コラム

The Authority to Kill

死刑より恐ろしい死刑への沈黙

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
暴力犯罪の増加で、さらにしぼんだ死刑論争
だが不安な時代にこそ権威に追従しない勇気を
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
メリー・ホワイト（ボストン大学教授）

　6月26日、オウム真理教の元幹部、新実智光が死刑判決を受けた。刑が執行されれば、テロリストの死に満足感を覚える人は少なくないだろうし、安堵に胸をなで下ろす人もいるだろう。

　しかし大半の日本人は、新実の死も死刑という問題も、見て見ぬふりをするのではないだろうか。死刑など話題にすることはおろか、考えるのも嫌だという理由で。

　だが世界には、死刑について議論を重ねている人々もいる。アメリカの死刑制度に批判的な姿勢を示すヨーロッパでは、日本の死刑制度に目を向ける動きも出てきている。ヨーロッパの人々にとって、日本の死刑制度は筋の通らない残酷なものなのだ。

　こうした批判を内政干渉と受け取る向きもあるかもしれない。だが近年、刑事裁判や裁判権といった問題は、犯罪人引き渡しなどにみられるように、個々の国だけの話ではなくなってきた。それぞれの国の法律や慣習は、世界の視線にさらされている。

　もちろん日本にも、ヨーロッパの人々のような死刑反対論者はいる。死刑が秘密裏に執行されることに不信をいだき、「捜査段階での自白の強要」といったニュースに危機感を覚えてのことだ。

沈黙のツケは必ず回ってくる

　それでも、死刑をめぐる議論はほとんど行われていない。犯罪や刑罰に関する話など聞きたくないのだろうか。事情を知るということは、なんらかの行動を起こす責任を負うことだから、耳をふさいでいたいのだろうか。

　だが理由はどうあれ、こうした日本人の「見て見ぬふり」は、死刑の執行や死刑囚に関する政府の秘密主義を助長する結果となっている。

　日本でもアメリカでも、極刑で応じるしか考えられないような残酷な犯罪が起きている。日本ではオウムのサリン事件がもたらした恐怖が、アメリカではテロへの恐れが、法の下の公正と平等の原則を打ち負かしてしまうかもしれない。そうした状況では、「テロリスト」とレッテルを張られた人々が死刑を宣告されることもありうる。

　その一方で、アメリカではDNA鑑定によって複数の死刑囚の無実が証明され、裁判所の審理の質を問う声が上がった。日本では、嘘の供述や警察官による暴力行為が明らかになるにつれ、捜査への信頼が揺らいでいる。

　それでも日本人は、いっこうに議論を始めようとしない。この沈黙のツケは、いつか必ず回ってくる。不況が続き、暴力犯罪が増加している今、おおっぴらに死刑問題について議論すれば、かえって社会不安を増大させることになる――そんな意識があるのかもしれない。

　不安のなかで人々は、死刑についての話を避け、社会が人殺し（つまり死刑）を行う権限を否定していいかどうか迷う。そして、死刑を行うだけの力を与えておけば、社会は自分たちの身を守ってくれるはずだと信じ込もうとする。だが市民社会において、そうした力、そして沈黙は危険だ。

完璧な裁判などありえない

　人生において、死ほど冷厳な事実はない。死刑とは、他の人間を故意に殺した人間を、国家や公共機関の権限で死をもって罰することを意味する。だが、その権限をどう行使するかという条件はあいまいで、死というものの「揺るぎなさ」とはかけ離れている。

　死はまちがいなく人生に終止符を打つが、死刑には過ちが生じやすい。死刑がどうしても必要なら、死刑制度も裁判も完璧なものでなければならない。公平で、気まぐれとは無縁でなくてはならない。だが人間の行う裁判は不完全で、ときには非人道的なものだ。

　以前、私の息子は冷蔵庫に、こんな標語のステッカーを張った――「権威を疑え」。不安のただなかにあっては困難かもしれないが、そんな時代だからこそ権威は疑わなくてはならない。

　人々が議論を重ねても、社会は弱体化しない。それどころか、司法制度の影の部分に光を当てることができる。アメリカでは最近、知的障害をもつ犯罪者に死刑を適用しないという司法判断が行われた。これも長い間、アメリカ国民が議論を重ねてきた結果だ。

　今のように政治的にも経済的にも不安定で、治安すら危うくなっている時代だからこそ、死刑について議論を行い、死と生、国家権力への根本的な問いかけをするべきだ。

　そろそろ、死刑を行う権威を疑ってみるときではないだろうか。

Merry White
ボストン大学人類学・社会学教授。ハーバード大学ライシャワー日本研究所研究員。著書に『ママ、どうしてあんなに勉強しなくちゃいけないの』など。

ニューズウィーク日本版 2002年8月7日号　P.9

New York Times 2002/06/30

International
June 30, 2002
Secrecy of Japan's Executions Is Criticized as Unduly Cruel
By HOWARD W. FRENCH


OSAKA, Japan, June 24 - When the hangman failed to summon him from his cell by late December, Toshihiko Hasegawa, a convicted murderer, reckoned that, by the practices of Japan's penal system, he had at least one more year to live.

After weeks of intense foreboding over the approach of death, Mr. Hasegawa wrote his adoptive mother to tell her that he could at last breathe freely again for one more year, when he expected that his execution watch would resume.

"It seems that I will somehow be able to survive this year's Christmas," he wrote. "This is thanks to you, Mother, who is praying to God for me every day, and I am really grateful. The fact I am about to survive this Christmas means I am newly given the precious time to devote myself to faith and atonement for my sins, and I have to use this time usefully, not to waste even a minute."

Two days later, though, without any advance notice to him or his family, the 51-year-old prisoner was led from his cell and hanged. Takako Hasegawa, a 63-year-old Roman Catholic nun whose religious name is Sister Luisa and who adopted the death row inmate in 1993 after his conversion to Christianity, was informed several hours after the execution in a telephone call from the prisoner's sister.

"My head was just swimming," she said in an interview. "I was in shock."

Each year, around the year's end or early spring depending on the prison, a handful of inmates are led from their cells and hanged. What does not vary is the policy of near total secrecy that the families of the executed and human rights groups say makes Japan's practice of capital punishment unnecessarily cruel.

Prisoners are told of their execution only moments before their hanging, and are given only enough time to clean their cells, write a final letter and receive last rites. Relatives are told of the execution only after the fact and are given a mere 24 hours to collect the body.

Adding to the secrecy, the Ministry of Justice refuses to release the names of the hanged, except to their relatives, or even to confirm the number of prisoners on death row, which human rights lawyers now estimate at 56.

Because it typically executes only five or six prisoners each year, Japan has managed to keep a relatively low profile with international campaigners against the death penalty. The United Nations Human Rights Commission, however, has condemned Japan's secretive executions.

Abolishing capital punishment, meanwhile, has recently become the object of a bipartisan campaign in the Japanese Parliament, with many members focusing on the secretive handling of prisoners as the death penalty's most anachronistic feature.

"The Hasegawa family was lucky," said Reiko Oshima, a member of Parliament who seeks to abolish the death penalty. "He was executed in Nagoya and had a sister who lived nearby. If the family lived far away or they couldn't be contacted immediately, the body would have been disposed of.

"Of course the death penalty by its very nature is cruel, but all of these things make it much worse."

Justice Ministry officials, for their part, insist that their system of secret executions is the most humane form of capital punishment.

"It would be more cruel if we notified the inmates of their execution beforehand because it would inflict a major pain on them," said Jun Aoyama, a ministry official. "They would lose themselves to despair. They might even try to commit suicide or escape."

In interviews, however, a former death row inmate and several relatives of executed prisoners all emphasized the severe anguish, which they said the practice of secret executions had caused them.

Sakae Menda spent 34 years on death row before becoming one of the rare Japanese to be released, in 1983, after his conviction was set aside. In an interview, Mr. Menda described the excruciating uncertainty he felt each time execution season rolled around. Over the years, he said, about 70 of his friends were shuffled away to their hangings.

"Between 8 and 8:30 in the morning was the most critical time, because that was generally when prisoners were notified of their execution," Mr. Menda said. "Once you get past that moment, life resumes until the next day. But during those minutes, things get so quiet that the only sound you can hear is the feet of the wardens.

"You begin to feel the most terrible anxiety, because you don't know if they are going to stop in front of your cell. It is impossible to express how awful a feeling this was. I would have shivers down my spine. It was absolutely unbearable."

Mr. Menda scoffs at the idea that withholding notification of prisoners' executions is a gesture of kindness. "Making us go through 30 to 40 minutes of intense stress like that every day was part of a system meant to make us docile," he said. "Saying they don't notify prisoners of their death beforehand because it isn't good for the inmates is just an excuse. The reality is that this is done for the convenience of the authorities."

Relatives of prisoners and death penalty opponents say the practice of secret executions has withstood calls for reform because of the powerful role of shame in Japanese society. Here, one's identity is far more tied up with one's family than in the West, and the taint of any serious crime can blight an entire household for generations.

For this reason, the bodies of most executed prisoners go unclaimed, because the families have already disassociated themselves from the criminal. Few relatives are willing to protest publicly, or even comment on the state's execution policies.

For some on death row, their main link with the outside world has come through adoption. Ms. Hasegawa adopted her recently executed son in 1993, when he was 43 years old and had exhausted all appeals over his conviction for the murder of three people in an insurance fraud scheme. In doing so, she joined a small but fervent community of Christians and other social activists in Japan who adopt prisoners to prevent them from facing total isolation.

"He had three siblings, but they decided they didn't want to have anything to do with him," she said of Toshihiko Hasegawa. "His father visited him once or twice before he died, but they lived in the countryside and faced a lot of ostracism, with people watching them all the time. In Japan, that is the way shame functions."

Itsuko and Toshiichi Ajima, a gently graying couple in their 50's, also adopted a man on death row. In 1994, Ms. Ajima learned of the execution of Yukio, her adopted son, in a telegram from the prison that read: "We want to discuss something urgently. Please call us immediately."

When they telephoned, a prison official said: "Today, we parted with Yukio-san. Shall we cremate the body, or will you pick it up within 24 hours?"

The Ajimas have spent the years since writing letters to legislators and making television appearances aimed at raising public awareness about the death penalty. "We felt we had to do whatever we could to make sure that he was the last person in Japan to die like this."

With so few biological relatives of prisoners willing to speak out, one of the most powerful advocates of the abolishment of capital punishment has turned out to be Masaharu Harada, 55, a brother of one of Mr. Hasegawa's insurance fraud victims who has often appeared on television here to condemn the death penalty.

After his imprisonment, Mr. Hasegawa wrote regularly to Mr. Harada to express his remorse over the killing, and for years, the victim's brother said he burned the letters without reading them. When he finally did open a letter one day, Mr. Harada said he was impressed with the sincerity of the prisoner's search for atonement.

"I began to wonder, how can people atone if they are put to death, and, will I be healed by the execution?" Mr. Harada said, explaining his transformation into a campaigner against the death penalty.

The policy of secrecy, he said, is a mistaken effort to preserve the dignity of the state.

"It is as if they are saying, `Anything the state does is just,' " Mr. Harada said. "But the prisoner himself, as well as the family members, should be notified beforehand. Just think how cruel it is to spend your life every day thinking you or your family might be executed today or tomorrow."


(Photo) Stuart Isett/Gamma, for The New York Times
Sudden executions in Japan can surprise relatives, like Itsuko and Toshiichi Ajima, mourning an adopted son.

Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company

Japan Times 2002/05/28

Death penalty seminar commences
Lawmakers, Council of Europe discuss abolition of capital punishment

A group of Japanese lawmakers and representatives from the Council of Europe opened a joint two-day seminar Monday in Tokyo on the abolition of capital punishment.
"The death penalty goes against the idea of respecting precious life. I soon want to take legislative proceedings and endeavor to shape public opinion," said Shizuka Kamei, the head of the Diet members' League for the Abolition of the Death Penalty.

The leaders of both houses of the Diet were among some 50 lawmakers and others attending.

Member states of the 44-nation Council of Europe have not exercised the death penalty since 1997, according to the council. But Japan and the United States, which are observers on the council, continue to execute criminals.

The Council of Europe last June adopted a resolution to revoke the observer status of Japan and the U.S. if they do not take concrete steps toward abolishing the death penalty by next Jan. 1.

Renate Wohlwend, vice president of the Council of Europe Assembly, criticized Japan for continuing to use capital punishment, and called for its quick abolishment.

But Justice Minister Mayumi Moriyama, who also attended the seminar, was cool to the idea.

"The majority of the Japanese public thinks the death penalty is inevitable in the case of brutal, serious crimes. I hope that you understand the reality of how cautiously the penalty has been exercised," Moriyama said, indicating that she has no intention to seek its abolishment.

朝日 2002/05/27

死刑廃止しなければ人権後進国　大島令子（私の視点）
（朝日新聞東京本社発行　５月２７日付朝刊）


　昨年暮れ、東京と名古屋の拘置所で２人の死刑囚に刑が執行された。実は名古屋で処刑された死刑囚による被害者の遺族は、昨年４月に高村正彦法相（当時）と面談し、「生きているからこそ、償いの気持ちも生じる。刑を執行しないでほしい」と要望していた。

　森山真弓法相は、前任者からこの報告を受けていたにもかかわらず、就任６カ月で死刑執行命令書に判を押したのである。

　私は処刑者のうちの１人の遺体を名古屋拘置所で遺族とともに引き取り、遺体の首を写真におさめた。棺（ひつぎ）を開け、遺体の頸部（けいぶ）にかけられた白い布をめくると、紅紫（あかむらさき）の太い縄のあとがくっきりと残っていた。まさに絞首刑である。

　大粒の涙をふきながら、遺族の同意を得た上でカメラのシャッターを押した。冷酷と思われるかもしれないが、死刑の実態とこの処刑がいかに痛ましく残酷であるか、法相に正しく認識してもらうためである。

　４月の衆議院法務委員会でこの写真を森山法相に見せたところ、法相は数秒間険しい表情で見つめた後、「法務大臣の責任上そのような決定をしなければならなかったことは、大変重い意味があるという思いを深くした」と答弁された。

　現在、わが国の死刑確定者は５０人を数える。その中で冤罪の可能性を全く否定できない現実がある。

　私は決して法相を個人攻撃しようとは思っていない。法相が言う「法律に従って責任を果たす」こと自体が、「生命権」を冒涜（ぼうとく）する行為であると訴えたいのである。

　８９年、いわゆる「島田事件」で死刑判決を受けた赤堀政夫さんが、再審で無罪となり、３５年ぶりに解放された。精神障害を理由に差別されながらも、冤罪を訴えてきた彼の第一声は、「死刑をする法律をやめてください」という訴えであった。赤堀さんのこの一言が、私の死刑廃止に向けた闘いのきっかけである。

　死刑肯定論者は、犯罪抑止力の必要性や、犯罪被害者の遺族の心情を考慮すべきだと主張する。だが、死刑が決して犯罪防止につながらないことは、近年、凶悪事件が多発していることを見ても明らかである。

　犯罪被害者の遺族の心中は察するにあまりあり、犯人への強い憤りは人間として自然な気持ちである。人の生命は重く、大切だ。だからこそ、私は国家が死刑執行という殺人行為を公務員に職務としてさせることは許されないと考える。

　わが国は被害者及び被害者の遺族に対し何ら補償をしてこなかったことも重大な問題で、早急に解決しなければならない。ただ、死刑制度の廃止とは相対立することではなく、人権や生命を尊重する意味で同じなのである。

　現在、私は「死刑廃止を推進する議員連盟」（会長・亀井静香衆議院議員）の幹事として、仮出獄を認めない終身刑を軸とした死刑廃止法案を早急に提出するべく準備を進めている。

　２７日から２日間、欧州評議会司法人権委員会の議員２０人が来日し、参議院議員会館内で死刑廃止議員連盟と合同でセミナーを開催する。死刑制度について、率直な議論を交わしたい。

　死刑判決を受けたこともある金大中大統領が率いる韓国では、すでに国会議員の半数を超す署名を集め、昨年１０月、死刑廃止特別法案が国会に提出された。

　世評や支持率をみて行動する政治家が多い中、人間の尊厳や命にかかわることを「世論」だけで決めてよいのだろうか。このままでは日本は人権後進国になってしまう。一刻も早く死刑制度を廃止するべきだ。

　（おおしま・れいこ　衆議院議員＜社民党＞、死刑廃止議員連盟幹事）

Japan Times 2001/11/03

Kamei becomes new head of death penalty abolitionists

Shizuka Kamei, a former policy chief of the Liberal Democratic Party, on Friday became head of a group of 76 Diet members who want to abolish the death penalty in Japan.
Toshiko Hamayotsu, deputy leader of New Komeito, was elected deputy head at a meeting of the group Friday attended by legislators from across the political spectrum.

Chyung Dai Chul, a lawmaker from South Korea's ruling Millennium Democratic Party, gave a lecture at the session. On Oct. 30, Chyung and 153 other lawmakers in South Korea from the ruling and opposition camps submitted a bill to abolish the death penalty in South Korea.

Kamei, a former senior official at the National Police Agency, opposes capital punishment, saying there can be false judgment in the Japanese judiciary, which he says depends too much on confessions and an overly strong sense of trust by judges on police and prosecutors.

The Diet group was formed in April 1994, and Kamei is the fourth politician to lead it.

死刑問題へ

その他へ

Topへ