Courtroom Discourse of the ‘Hybrid’ Japanese Criminal Justice System

Author:

Nakane Ikuko,

Abstract

In the Japanese courtroom, an adversarial orientation is often manifested in the ways in which prosecution and defence counsels each utilize discourse strategies to construct competing narratives, for example, by asking coercive negative questions in cross-examination. Alternatively, counsel’s attempt at building a convincing narrative is at times thwarted by the judge’s inquisitorial orientation to attempt to elicit ‘the truth.’ This paper aims to explore the discourse of Japanese criminal trials, drawing on an ethnographic study of communication in courtroom settings in Japan. The paper specifically focuses on how the hybridity of adversarial and inquisitorial orientations to the justice process are realized in courtroom discourse. Drawing on courtroom observation notes, lawyer interviews and other relevant materials as data, I analyze Japan’s ‘hybrid’ legal system through observing its trial genre structure, narrative construction processes and courtroom discourse strategies. Analysis suggests that blame, moral preaching and attribution of collective responsibility are sometimes incorporated into the process of questioning the defendant and witnesses in a court of law. Within this paper, the analysis of trial discourses reveals that while operating in the framework of adversarial principles, Japanese criminal trials also allow for a discursive practice particular to these courtroom settings which seeks to maintain moral and social order in Japan as a society that is structured on a hierarchical institutional power structure. The paper concludes that specifically designed language powerfully conveys the delivery and attainment of justice, where further research anthropological linguistic work can advance our understandings of the legal process, in Japan and beyond.

Publisher

The CALA Unit, SOAS University of London

Subject

Linguistics and Language,Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous),Anthropology,Cultural Studies

Reference47 articles.

1. Bennett, W. L., & Feldman, M. S. (1981). Reconstructing Reality in the Courtroom: Justice and judgment in American culture. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

2. Conley, J. M. and W. M. O'Barr (1990). Rules versus Relationships: The Ethnography of Legal Discourse. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

3. Creaton, J., & Pakes, F. (2012). Adversarial or inquisitorial justice? In Ellis, T. & Savage, S. P. (eds.) Debates in Criminal Justice: KeyTthemes and Issues (pp. 52-60). London and New York: Routledge.

4. Drew, P. (1990). Strategies in the Contest Between Lawyer and Witness in Cross-examination. In Levi, J. N. & Walker, A. G. (eEds.), Language in the Judicial Process (pp. 39-64). New York: Plenum Press.

5. Drew, P. (1992). Contested Evidence in Courtroom Cross-examination: The Case of a Trial for Rape. In Drew, P. & Heritage, J. D. (eds.), Talk at Work: Interaction in Institutional Settings (pp. 470-520). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3