Amanda Robinson
Mountainview High School
October 1, 2025
If murder is wrong, why does the country still kill in the name of justice? Why are the citizens allowing this to continue? In Japan today, the death penalty remains a legal form of punishment carried out by hanging, even though more than 140 countries around the world have abolished it (Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries, n.d.). As of 2025, over 100 inmates remain on death row, many of them waiting for decades in solitary confinement (Sato, 2024). The timing of executions is kept secret, and prisoners are often informed only on the morning of their death. Additionally, lawyers and even families are typically notified afterward, keeping the process out of public view. The most recent execution occurred on June 27, 2025, despite growing criticism from international organizations, such as the United Nations (Komiya & Coates, 2025). Nevertheless, a majority of Japanese citizens continue to support the death penalty, 83% approving of it in a government survey that was conducted a year ago, “through a questionnaire sent to 3,000 people aged 18 or older nationwide” (Morishita, 2025). Supporters claim that executions provide closure for victims’ families and deter heinous crimes. However, these justifications do not stand up to evidence nor moral reasoning. The death penalty does not achieve its stated goals, imposes unnecessary financial costs, and prevents society from promoting genuine respect for human life. In short, the death penalty should be abolished.
The most common argument in favor of the death penalty is that “families of victims will be able to have closure,” with 62.2% of respondents agreeing (Morishita, 2025). While it is natural for families to seek revenge after a tragic loss, execution should not be the only path to achieve it. For example, psychological support, counseling, and long-term community assistance can offer healthier and more constructive ways for families to handle grief. Furthermore, the idea of closure through execution raises serious moral concerns. Is the pursuit of closure truly a sufficient reason to end another human life, especially when alternatives exist? Justice should not be equated with revenge, and society must prioritize healing without resorting to irreversible violence.
Another popular argument for keeping the death penalty is that it is effective as a crime deterrent, with 53.4% of Japanese citizens believing that executions prevent murder, according to the same survey conducted last year (Morishita, 2025). However, research consistently shows this is not the case. For instance, when France abolished the death penalty in 1981, its homicide rate showed no significant change (Amnesty International Japan, n.d.). Likewise, Canada, which abolished executions in 1976, now has a lower homicide rate than the United States, where the death penalty is still practiced (Amnesty International Japan, n.d.). Moreover, a 2002 United Nations study concluded that there is no scientific evidence to suggest that capital punishment is more effective in suppressing crime than life imprisonment (Amnesty International Japan, n.d.). In short, the death penalty does not prevent murder, nor can it address the deeper causes or consequences of violence.
In addition to being ineffective, maintaining the death penalty system is a waste of money. Because executions cannot be undone, trials and retrials require additional time and resources, making them far more expensive than regular trials. In addition, in Japan, for safety reasons people on death row cannot work or take part in prison labor (死刑について 第2回, 2005) and prison labor in Japan earned about 4.7 billion yen in 2010 (Amnesty International Japan, n.d.). If the death penalty were abolished, the money spent on trials and executions could instead be used for crime prevention or for supporting victims’ families. Rather than using money to carry out executions, it would be better to let offenders work and make a constructive contribution to society.
Finally, abolishing the death penalty will lead to a society where everyone values and respects all human life. By ending executions, Japan would send a strong message to children that taking another person’s life is never acceptable, no matter the circumstance. No human should kill another, and there is no real benefit in doing so. If society continues to allow executions, even carried out in secret as in Japan, what lessons does that teach about justice? True justice should not be hidden, nor should it rely on killing. Instead, abolishing the death penalty would encourage future generations to embrace dignity, compassion, and the protection of life.
In conclusion, the death penalty in Japan should be abolished. Claims that it provides closure for victims’ families or deters crime are not supported by evidence, and there are more constructive ways to heal and prevent crime. At the same time, maintaining the system is a waste of money and offers no genuine social benefit. Most importantly, abolishing the death penalty would help build a society that teaches respect for life and true justice to future generations. Ending executions is not only more feasible but also more humane, shaping Japan’s future with fairness and compassion rather than fear.
Word count: 842
References
死刑について 第2回. (2005, May 13). 高崎経済大学. Retrieved October 1, 2025.
Abolitionist and Retentionist Countries. (n.d.). Death Penalty Information Center. Retrieved October 1, 2025.
Amnesty International Japan. (n.d.). 死刑に関するQ&A. アムネスティ日本. Retrieved September 23, 2025.
Komiya, K., & Coates, S. (2025, June 27). Japan hangs 'Twitter killer' in first execution since 2022. Reuters. Retrieved September 23, 2025.
Morishita, Y. (2025, March 10). Survey: 83% of Japanese still support death penalty. The Asahi Shimbun. Retrieved September 23, 2025.
Sato, D. (2025, April 25). Growing Opposition to Japan’s Death Penalty. Nippon.com. Retrieved September 23, 2025.