An essay written by Uha

First-year student at the University of Tsukuba, Japan

Permission for publication was granted in September 2023.

As individuals grow up, they learn to behave to avoid punishment from their parents, teachers, and society. The extreme cases of this take the form of capital punishment, also known as the death penalty. Despite the controversy surrounding it, this punishment still exists in Japan. The trends of homicide rates and executions in Japan, homicide resulting from suicidal despair, and wrongful convictions raise uncertainty about the effectiveness of the death penalty as a deterrent, leading to questions about the current justice system. 

Firstly, the number of homicides and executions in Japan has been decreasing (“Shikei shikkousū”; “Keihouhan”). According to the Hanzai tōkei shiryou (犯罪統計資料 Crime statistics), the total number of homicides in 2022 was 853, which is a decrease of 38% since 2000 (9; “Keihouhan”). Simultaneously, the number of executions in the past decade has also shown a trend of decrease. Of course, e the rates of extreme crimes. On the other hand, the factors influencing the number of executions – the constitution of Japan, and its definition of justice and punishment – have not changed. Yet the homicide rate in Japan is lower than ever, showing negative trends. For instance, even when the number of executions was low, there was no drastic upturn in the number of crimes in the following years. It appears that the existence of the death penalty does not directly lead to a change in the crime rate (“Shikei ni kansuru Q&A”). This raises the question of whether the death penalty is needed as a deterrence. 

Furthermore, there have been cases where the penalty did not serve its specific function as a form of punishment. For example, there are cases in which a person commits a crime to be executed. The perpetrator of the Tsuchiura murder in 2008 killed eight people because he wished to be executed (Hagiwara). This motive sheds light on those who were victims of society and were not remedied. It reveals capital punishment as a form of suicide for some individuals. On the other hand, some opinions supporting the death penalty include the concept of retributive law, “an eye for an eye” – a murder must be paid with the murderer’s life. This justifies the death penalty as a method of revenge to put closure to the consequence of a crime. In reality, when a homicide occurs from the suicidal despair of the perpetrator, the death penalty is a reward rather than a deterrent or a punishment. Not only does the execution take away one’s life, but also the chance for rehabilitation. 

Another equally significant issue is the occurrence of false charges. The death penalty places innocent individuals at risk of losing their lives. In the case of Masao Akahori, he was sentenced to death for the murder of a girl in 1958 (“Nihon”).  He lost 30 years of his life in fear of the death penalty behind bars. He was then acquitted upon retrial in 1989. This was impactful as the judiciary nearly killed an innocent person in the name of justice. By all means, no investigations and trials are perfect. Nevertheless, putting an individual's life on the Scales of Justice is irreversible, potentially changing their life. Abolishing the death penalty may help prevent wrongful convictions. Overall, the death penalty can be viewed as a form of murder, as it takes the life of an innocent person. Society puts the basic human right to life at risk of the citizens in exchange for an opaque concept of deterrence. 

In conclusion, there is uncertainty about how much the death penalty is effective. While both the homicide and execution rates in Japan have been decreasing, there is no direct relationship between the homicide rates and the death penalty. In addition, the death penalty does not appear to be an appropriate punishment depending on the circumstances of homicide or false charge. These cases exemplify the need for enhanced social security to prevent homicides from happening and ensure thorough crime investigation and trial. While some form of punishment may be necessary, the death penalty does not seem to be the most suitable option. It is crucial to address the root causes of crime instead of relying on the illusion that increasing sacrifices of the death penalty will lead to peace. 

Word count: 716

Works Cited:

HAGIWARA, Yuuta 萩原雄太. “‘Hito wo korosu no ha ka wo korosu no to onaji’ Tsuchiura renzoku satujin jiken: Kanagawa Masahiro no kamen no shita ni hisomu kyōki”「人を殺すのは蚊を殺すのと同じ」土浦連続殺人事件・金川真大の仮面の下に潜む狂気. Nikkan Saizō 日刊サイゾー, 27 June 2014, Web. www.cyzo.com/2014/06/post_17620_entry.html. Accessed 18 June 2023.

“Keihouhan ni yoru shibou higaishasū to satsujin ninchi kensū” 刑法犯による死亡被害者数と殺人認知件数・検挙件数 . CrimeInfo, 2021, Web. www.crimeinfo.jp/data/toukei/statistics_09-2/. Accessed 18 June 2023.

“Nihon bengoshi rengoukai: Shikei haishi wo kangaeru [Q12] shikei hanketsu ga kakutei shita enzai jiken no rei” 日本弁護士連合会：死刑廃止を考える［Q12］死刑判決が確定したえん罪事件の例. 日本弁護士連合会 [Japan Federation of Bar Associations], 25 June 2013, Web. www.nichibenren.or.jp/activity/criminal/deathpenalty/q12/enzaiex.html. Accessed 5 July 2023.

“Reiwa 4 nen 1~12 gatsu hanzai tōkei [Kakuteichi]” 令和4年１～12月犯罪統計【確定値. Hanzai tōkei shiryou 犯罪統計資料, vol. 640, 7 Feb. 2023, pp. 9–10. E-Stat, Web. www.e-stat.go.jp/stat-search/files?page=1&layout=datalist&toukei=00130001&tstat=000001201280&cycle=0&year=20220&month=0&tclass1val=0.

“Shikei ni kansuru Q&A” 死刑に関するQ&A. アムネスティ日本 [AMNESTY], Web. www.amnesty.or.jp/human-rights/topic/death_penalty/qa.html#Q1. Accessed 18 June 2023.

“Shikei shikkousū” 死刑執行数. CrimeInfo, 2021, Web. www.crimeinfo.jp/data/toukei/execution/. Accessed 18 June 2023.