Japan Compliance

The adjudication of sexual assault cases presents profound challenges to any criminal justice system. These cases often occur in private, with no third-party witnesses, and may lack definitive forensic evidence, particularly if there is a delay in reporting. Consequently, the testimony of the alleged victim (被害者供述 - higaisha kyōjutsu) frequently

When a person engages in a course of criminal conduct, their actions may simultaneously or sequentially violate multiple criminal statutes, or harm multiple victims or legal interests. A fundamental task for the Japanese criminal justice system in such situations is to determine the "number of offenses" (罪数 -

Fraudulent schemes that victimize numerous individuals through a series of repeated deceptive acts are a persistent challenge for legal systems. Common examples include ongoing fundraising scams, serial investment frauds, or systematic overcharging schemes. When confronted with such a course of conduct, a critical question arises for the criminal justice system:

In the realm of criminal law, individuals who agree with others to commit a crime can find themselves ensnared by the doctrine of conspiracy joint principalship (共謀共同正犯 - kyōbō kyōdō seihan). Under Japanese law, this means that even if a person does not physically participate in the execution of the

When multiple individuals collaborate to commit a crime, Japanese criminal law seeks to hold each culpable party appropriately responsible. The doctrine of "joint principals" (共同正犯 - kyōdō seihan), established under Article 60 of the Penal Code, is central to this endeavor. Beyond those who physically carry out the

In the complex web of criminal activity, not all participants are directly involved in the physical execution of an offense. Often, a "mastermind" or leader orchestrates events from a distance, directing others to carry out the illicit acts. Japanese criminal law, through the sophisticated doctrine of "joint

In the landscape of criminal law, an attempt to commit a crime (未遂 - misui) is generally punishable, reflecting society's interest in preventing harm even before it fully materializes. However, Japanese law, like many other legal systems, recognizes a special category of attempt known as "voluntary abandonment&

The realm of criminal law is not solely concerned with completed offenses; it also extends to situations where an individual endeavors to commit a crime but, for various reasons, fails to achieve the intended result. This is the domain of criminal attempt (未遂 - misui). However, a particularly perplexing subset

When an individual who has committed a crime chooses to voluntarily present themselves to law enforcement authorities and confess their actions, this act of surrender can have significant legal ramifications within the Japanese criminal justice system. Known as "jishu" (自首), this concept is formally recognized in Japan'

The age-old legal maxim "ignorance of the law is no excuse" (ignorantia juris non excusat) resonates across many legal traditions. In Japan, this principle is formally encapsulated in Article 38, paragraph 3 of the Penal Code. However, the seemingly straightforward nature of this rule belies a complex and

Running a red light is a universally recognized dangerous driving behavior, frequently leading to tragic accidents. In Japan, while ordinary instances of failing to stop at a red signal are addressed by the Road Traffic Act, a particularly egregious form of this misconduct, when it results in death or injury,

Aggressive driving and "road rage" incidents are a concerning global phenomenon, leading to property damage, injuries, and even fatalities. Japan, like other nations, has specific legal provisions to address severe forms of dangerous driving that result in harm. Within its framework for "Dangerous Driving Causing Death or

Impaired driving, whether due to alcohol or drugs, poses a grave threat to public safety, and legal systems worldwide have implemented stringent measures to combat it. In Japan, beyond standard DUI offenses, a more serious crime known as "Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Injury" (危険運転致死傷罪 - kiken unten

In Japan, as in many legal systems, individuals who commit serious offenses while suffering from severe mental illness may be found not criminally responsible due to legal insanity or to have diminished capacity. However, such a finding does not necessarily mean the end of legal proceedings. Japan's "

Tax evasion (租税ほ脱犯 - sozei hodatsuhan) is regarded as a serious offense in Japan, undermining public finances and the principle of fair taxation. Conviction carries substantial penalties, including imprisonment and hefty fines. However, like many financial crimes, securing a conviction for tax evasion hinges critically on proving the defendant'

The legal maxim "ignorance of the law is no excuse" holds significant sway in most criminal justice systems. In Japan, this principle is explicitly recognized in Article 38, paragraph 3 of the Penal Code. However, when it comes to "administrative offenses" (行政犯 - gyōseihan)—violations of

The principle of culpability is central to criminal justice: individuals should only be held criminally responsible for their actions if they possess the requisite mental capacity to understand their conduct and its wrongfulness, and to control their behavior. When an individual with an intellectual disability (知的障害 - chiteki shōgai, also

The relationship between drug addiction, substance abuse, and criminal behavior is a complex issue that legal systems around the world grapple with. In Japan, when an offense is committed by an individual suffering from drug addiction (薬物中毒 - yakubutsu chūdoku) or while acutely under the influence of drugs, a critical

The intersection of alcohol consumption and criminal behavior is a frequent concern for legal systems worldwide. Generally, voluntary intoxication—simply getting drunk—does not serve as an excuse for committing a crime. Japanese criminal law largely adheres to this principle, often applying the doctrine of actio libera in causa (原因において自由な行為

The intersection of mental illness and criminal law presents profound challenges for any legal system. When an individual suffering from a severe mental disorder such as schizophrenia commits a criminal act, questions inevitably arise about their culpability and legal responsibility. Japanese criminal law, like many other developed legal systems, provides

The right to self-defense (正当防衛 - seitō bōei) is a well-established justification in Japanese criminal law, permitting individuals to use force to protect themselves or others from harm. However, this right is not absolute. Beyond the requirements that an attack be "imminent and unjust" and that the defender

Self-defense, recognized under Article 36 of Japan's Penal Code as 正当防衛 (seitō bōei), stands as a cornerstone justification for acts that would otherwise be criminal. For this defense to prevail, several conditions must be met, including the presence of an "imminent and unjust infringement." Beyond these

The right to defend oneself or others from harm is a fundamental principle recognized in legal systems across the globe. In Japan, this right is enshrined in Article 36 of the Penal Code, which provides for the justification of "self-defense" (正当防衛 - seitō bōei). However, the availability of

In criminal law, a fundamental principle for establishing guilt is the requirement of a causal link between the defendant's conduct and the prohibited harmful result. While the "but-for" test (known as the conditional theory, 条件説 - jōken setsu, in Japan) serves as an initial step to

In criminal law, establishing a causal link between a defendant's actions and a prohibited result is a cornerstone of liability, particularly for result-oriented crimes like homicide or injury. This link, known as causation (因果関係 - inga kankei), seems straightforward when an act directly leads to an outcome. However,