Volume 1, No. 7 (October, 1991), pp. 112-113
JAPANESE CRIMINAL JUSTICE by A. Didrick Castberg. Westport, CT:
Greenwood Press, 1990 168 pp. Cloth $42.95.
Reviewed by Joseph Sanders, University of Houston Law Center
The central question of JAPANESE CRIMINAL JUSTICE is by now a
well known one. Why is the Japanese crime rate so much lower than
that of the United States, and indeed of most developed nations?
That this is the case is beyond controversy. Compared to Japan,
the United States larceny rate is 4 times greater, the rape rate
is nearly 25 times greater and the robbery rate is a staggering
140 times greater (p. 12). Obviously, if we could we would we
would like to emulate this success.
Castberg often focuses on the narrower question of whether the
organization of the criminal justice system part of the
explanation for the low Japanese crime rate. He is wise enough to
recognize, however, that any answer to this question is
confounded by another: what effect does Japan's low crime rate
have on its criminal justice system? Throughout most of the
following chapters he raises these twin questions about each
aspect of the justice system.
The greatest strength of the book is its detailed presenta- tion
of basic information about the components of the justice system.
Individual chapters deal with general crime statistics, law
enforcement, legal education, prosecution, defense, the
judiciary, and corrections. They set forth fundamental similari-
ties and differences between the criminal codes, the nature of
trials (Japanese cases are heard for one or two hours each month
over a period of months or even years, p. 90), and legal educa-
tion (law is an undergraduate major in Japan as it is in much of
Europe). For those unfamiliar with Japan the book is a valuable
resource. The book is less successful, however, in answering its
basic twin questions. Often the threads of cause and effect seem
hopelessly tangled. Two examples from the chapter on corrections
make this point. First, Japanese prisons are not overcrowded and,
there- fore, the revolving door phenomena now prevalent in
several American jurisdictions does not exist. Second, Japanese
citizens still maintain a substantial belief in the
rehabilitative ideal. A 1986 survey found that nearly 60% of the
respondents felt that affection in addition to severity is the
most effective treatment of prisoners (p. 114). To what extent
are the above two facts the cause or the effect of differences in
Japanese and American crime rates? The answer is so elusive one
wonders whether it is even worthwhile to pose the question at
this level.
More useful is the final chapter discussion which relates the
crime rate to other features of Japanese society in general. Here
Castberg mentions a number of factors that may affect various
components of the crime rate. For example, the relative success
of the Japanese economy may reduce property crimes. Strict
Page 113 follows
gun control and a near monopoly on the use of weapons by the
authorities may reduce violent crime. The low dropout rate and
the length of the school year, the school week (five and one-half
days) and the school day may reduce delinquency.
Ultimately, however, Castberg, like most commentators, places
substantial importance on Japanese and American structural and
cultural differences. If the United States is a relatively
heterogeneous and individualistic society, Japan is a homogeneous
and contextual society. A person's identity and place in society
is tied to his or her position in a hierarchical group structure.
The criminal justice system acts to support and reinforce this
structure and these cultural values. Following Herbert Packer's
terminology, the Japanese criminal justice system follows a Crime
Control Model aimed at supporting group harmony rather than a Due
Process Model aimed at protecting the individual from the state.
Japan's crime rate, and the structure of its criminal justice
system are both the consequence of the basic structure and values
of the society.
If this analysis is correct, and in its basic argument I believe
that it is, unfortunately the Japanese situation offers few
solutions to Americans searching for ways to reduce the crime
rate. Castberg basically agrees. This pessimistic conclusion
should not distract, however, from the very useful contribution
this book makes in providing us with the raw materials necessary
to make comparisons between the Japanese and American criminal
justice systems.