Project/Area Number |
14320021
|
Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (B)
|
Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
Section | 一般 |
Research Field |
Criminal law
|
Research Institution | Tohoku University |
Principal Investigator |
SAITO Toyoji Tohoku University, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (00068131)
|
Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
MORIYA Katsuhiko Tohoku-Gakuin University, School of Law, Professor, 法科大学院, 教授 (90328261)
SHIRATORI Yuji Hokkaido University, Graduate School of Law, Professor, 大学院・法学研究科, 教授 (10171050)
KUZUNO Hiroyuki Ritsumeikan University, Department of Law, Professor, 法学部, 教授 (90221928)
TAKEUCHI Kenji Kyushu University, Graduate School of Legal Studies, Assistant Professor, 法学研究院, 助教授 (10325540)
YAMAZAKI Toshie Osaka Economics and Law University, Department of Law, Lecturer, 法学部, 講師 (80388610)
佐々木 光明 神戸学院大学, 法学部, 教授 (70300225)
中川 孝博 龍谷大学, 法学部, 助教授 (40330352)
岡田 行雄 九州国際大学, 法学部, 助教授 (40284468)
|
Project Period (FY) |
2002 – 2004
|
Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2004)
|
Budget Amount *help |
¥14,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥14,200,000)
Fiscal Year 2004: ¥4,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥4,200,000)
Fiscal Year 2003: ¥5,800,000 (Direct Cost: ¥5,800,000)
Fiscal Year 2002: ¥4,200,000 (Direct Cost: ¥4,200,000)
|
Keywords | participation of prosecutor in juvenile hearing / adversary system / right to speak their own opinion / non-adversary system / partisanship of prosecutors and attorneys / attendant to juvenile / motion to appeal to High Court / professional juvenile prosecutor / 少年司法 / 原則逆送 / 改正少年法 / 刑事裁判所から家裁への移送 / 検察官の審判関与 / 審判構造 / 対審化 / 公設弁護人 / 家庭裁判所 / 少年法 / 少年審判 / 検察官 / 事実認定手続 / 検察官への逆送致 / 弁護士付添人 / 審判協力者 / 処分決定 |
Research Abstract |
Japanese Juvenile Law was revised in 2000 by which public prosecutors were allowed by Family Court to participate in juvenile court hearing. Main purpose of our research is to find the role of prosecutor in juvenile justice. Before the revision, they could not attend the hearing at all. There have been hot arguments pro or con on the revision. Some have been afraid of the juvenile hearing coming close to criminal court trial. Some others argued the adversary system may be better than non-adversary system for appropriate fact-finding. After the new law was put in effect, we need to conduct research about the actual role of the prosecutors in Japanese juvenile justice on evidence. First, we had interviewed with about 10 legal professions who actually experienced the juvenile hearing cases in which a public prosecutor participated. They were mostly private attorneys, a few judges, juvenile court probation officers. Our research found the fact that the role of prosecutors was different, de
… More
pending upon the discretion of the court judges. In majority cases, the prosecutor was not a "party" like in criminal court trial and played the role of supporting juvenile court judges in order to reach appropriate fact findings. However, when the juvenile denied the fact for which one was referred to the Family Court, judges preferred neutral position to ones in non-adversary system and asked the public prosecutor to work like in adversary system. Second, we conducted research in the United States, United Kingdom, France and Germany with regard to the role of public prosecutors in juvenile justice. We interviewed public prosecutors, juvenile court judges and private attorneys and some scholars. We also observed the hearings and trials, and visited institutions in these countries. We found the fact that the role of public prosecutors in juvenile justice strongly influenced by the role of public prosecutors in criminal justice. Therefore, in the United State and United Kingdom, they usually work as a party. In contrary, in German and French juvenile justices they did not play "aggressive role" as a party. However, public prosecutors in these countries acknowledged the differences between juvenile cases and adult cases. They said they also want to help the juveniles to become constructive, rehabilitate and to be reintegrated in society. Less
|