2004 Fiscal Year Final Research Report Summary
Role of Prosecutor in Juvenile Justice
| 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)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2002 – 2004
|
| 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 |
|---|
| 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
|
