Secretive Symbolism? The Death Penalty, Executions, and Japan
- PDF / 347,119 Bytes
- 23 Pages / 453.543 x 680.315 pts Page_size
- 34 Downloads / 198 Views
SECRETIVE SYMBOLISM? THE DEATH PENALTY, EXECUTIONS, AND JAPAN
ABSTRACT. The importance of analysing the death penalty and state-imposed executions is derived from their concerning the right to life, and their retaining widespread support throughout retentionist, abolitionist de facto, and abolitionist states worldwide. Discrepancies in the execution rates of retentionist states appear reducible to their serving symbolic or pragmatic functions i.e. they are used primarily to validate public opinion or primarily to deter crime. Prima facie, Japan seems akin to a symbolic state, due to its low execution rate and its official justification for both retaining the death penalty and continuing to use executions i.e. doing otherwise would be undemocratic. However, the practices that surround executions in Japan shroud them in secrecy and silence, which appears at odds with both its apparent symbolic function and this justification. This makes Japan a uniquely important case study for research on practices surrounding executions. Understanding why this contradiction exists will entail a more nuanced understanding of the ways in which the death penalty, executions, and the practices surrounding them, can function in retentionist states. This essay aids such understanding by critically analysing this official justification and various other arguments for why this might be the case and advancing an alternative explanation.
*Billy Holmes, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK. E-mail: [email protected].
BILLY HOLMES
I
ANALYSING THE DEATH PENALTY
The importance of analysing the death penalty is primarily derived from its concerning the ‘‘supreme right:’’ the right to life.1 There appears to be no government power greater than that of life and death.2 Accordingly, there seems to be ‘‘no government power in greater need of public oversight.’’3 The importance of analysing the death penalty also pertains to the persistence of wide-spread public support throughout retentionist,4 abolitionist in practice (de facto),5 and abolitionist6 states worldwide. For instance, in Russia and Brazil7 (abolitionist de facto states), 62% and 57%8 of the public favour reinstating capital punishment, respectively.9 Such support apparently motivated the Pilipino House of Representatives to approve a
1
ECOSOC. (1949). Summary Record of the 98th meeting. New York: United Nations, 10; The Government of Japan (1948). The Constitution of Japan. http:// www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail_main?id=174(accessed on 18/7/2020), article 13; United Nations Human Rights Committee. (2019). General comment No. 36 Article 6: Right to life. https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybody external/Download.aspx?symbolno=CCPR/C/GC/36&Lang=en (accessed on 18/7/ 2020), 2. 2
Johnson, D.T. (2006a). Japan’s Secretive Death Penalty Policy: Contours, Origins, Justifications, and Meanings. APLPJ, 7, 62, 76. 3
Ibid.
4
I.e. states that retain the death penalty.
5
I.e. states that have formally retained the death penalty but have not used it in at least 10 ye
Data Loading...
