[braythwayt]

Hello, have you met the US Criminal Justice System?

No, not that one.

I mean the system used for the poor and/or coloured and/or from a "shithole country." The one that cages children and has decided that prisoners do not need soap or disinfectant in the middle of a deadly pandemic.

The one that shoots first and asks questions later. The one that systemically plants evidence. The one that takes performs "parallel construction" to deceive the courts about the legality of its investigations. The one that had an entire building devoted to making interogatees "disappear."

I could go on, but I think I've made my point. If Japan is not up to "first-world standards," I have difficulty accepting that the US is up to first-world standards, whatever they may be.

[maallooc]

I've lived in Japan and a country that has Japan-like criminal justice system. The US criminal justice system way better than Japan's one. In Japan, both the judges' and prosecutions' powers are too strong.

Not like in the US where you actually have to convince a grand jury to prosecute and petite jury to convict, in Japan a single prosecutor can determine whether to prosecute or not and a single judge can decide whether your guilty or not. No judicial democracy, pretty much like the witch hunt in medieval times. Because lawyers are filled with elitism and vainglory, prosecution's arguments are almost always considered true. This becomes a problem if the case is a political one, just like in this case.

Yes, you can whine about US justice system being shitty but at least it is democratic and fair if done by law. Japan's one isn't.

[ciarannolan]

> Hello, have you met the US Criminal Justice System?

Curious why you felt the need to inject this "but America" argument into this thread?

The two men arrested aren't charged with any crimes in America. They will be dealing with the Japanese justice system once extradited. Fighting extradition from the US has nothing to do with "poor and/or coloured" people or whatever bizarre argument you're trying to make.

[braythwayt]

It’s the presumption that there is some uniform high standard for justice in the first world that I object to. Economic development and justice are not synonymous, and the US is an excellent example of the fact that a country can be considered first-world by definition, but not garner plaudits for its justice system.

I could also have raised some questions about Canada’s record for justice, especially with respect to our indigenous peoples. Our system may look good on paper, and be reasonable for most citizens, but Canadian justice is also distributed unevenly.

If someone says that Japan’s justice system is worthy of criticism on its own merits, I have no objection and have no reason to mention the US.

It is only the presumption that “first-world == justice” that prompts me to provide a counter-example. And I have just given another, so it is not just the US.

[fennecfoxen]

Recall that the first world is the United States and its allies, the second world is the USSR and its allies, and the third world is just all the rest. Then maybe look for better words to precisely convey your sentiments, instead of propping up your talk with old clichés ;)

The US justice system gets a lot of deserved flak for its failure to live up to its ideals, but it's a hell of a lot better than the police-accuse-you-confess-or-else standard pervasive in Japan. Some light reading on the topic:

https://www.economist.com/leaders/2015/12/05/forced-to-confe...

"It is impossible to know the true figure, but when 99.8% of prosecutions end in a guilty verdict, it is clear that the scales of justice are out of balance."

https://www.economist.com/asia/2015/12/03/silent-screams ("Why you might prefer a Bangkok jail to one in Chiba")

"Past inmates describe draconian rules. Eye contact with prison wardens is often forbidden or, when allowed, has to be accompanied by a smiling demeanour. Some compulsory prison work can be mind-numbing—folding pieces of paper into eight and unfolding them, for instance. Talk is banned for much of the day. Reading is only sometimes allowed.

Toshio Oriyama is a former restaurant owner who spent 22 years behind bars for a murder he insists he did not commit. “You weren’t free to do anything except breathe the air,” he says; even to stand up required a guard’s permission. Mr Oriyama had to sit cross-legged much of the time, in some pain; and “when we took a bath, the bums of all my inmates were dark like bedsores” from sitting in the same position all the time."

[kindatrue]

For the future, you may want to cite this link: https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/08/thirty-two...

It's not about Jeffrey Epstein, but 32 interesting deaths in US prisons. The one about guards burning a man to death with hot water was... unique.

[pnw_hazor]

Japan's correctional system is considered safer than many others but it certainly has it problems.

Generally they are more like strict military prisons with highly strict and specific rules and regimentation. Punishment for violating rules may include loss of privileges and often having to maintain stress positions (aka torture) for hours across multiple days.

Reform is underway but as like as everywhere else it is making slow progress.

https://www.prison-insider.com/countryprofile/prisonsinjapan...

[marcinzm]

>I have difficulty accepting that the US is up to first-world standards, whatever they may be.

This wasn't a thread about the US justice system, the only person making it so and making claims about what it is/it isn't is you. Just because something is shitty doesn't excuse other things for being shitty as well.

[braythwayt]

Under no circumstances am I claiming that Japan has an acceptable justice system, or that it is no worse than the US. I do claim that using “the first world” as a standard of justice is a flawed argument.

I think we can argue that Japan’s justice system is flawed, without introducing the claim that the first world has a worthy standard of justice.

If we do, I think it’s fair game to point out that the first-world has problems of its own, and give an example. In another reply, I also take Canada to task.

I am not claiming that because I consider argument-by-comparison-to-first-world-justice flawed, therefore the argument that Japan has unacceptably poor justice is flawed.

The remainder of the argument seems persuasive to me.

[pnw_hazor]

I meant first [world] standards in the sense of the elements I listed: due process, right to an attorney, presumption of innocence, right to bail, independent judiciary, and such. Not all first world countries excel at all of them, but Japan does not really have any of them.

Immigration is a different animal than criminal justice for various historical or policy reasons. Like many countries, Japan has its problems there too even with minuscule numbers of illegal immigrants as compared to the US or EU.

[braythwayt]

I certainly accept that every other first-world country claims to have these to one degree or another, and that for most of my lifetime, considered exceptions to these practices to be aberrations.

To the degree that we are talking about aspirations, I accept your suggestion.

[pnw_hazor]

No system is perfect.

Re illegal immigration in Japan:

"Many of the [Japan's] detention practices—including indefinite detention, lack of transparency regarding detention at ports of entry, and the detention of asylum seekers—have been repeatedly criticized by the international community as well as national civil society."

https://www.globaldetentionproject.org/countries/asia-pacifi...

"Japanese TV program turns migrant raids and deportations into entertainment" https://www.pri.org/stories/2018-10-26/japanese-tv-program-t...

[snazz]

The US criminal justice system is certainly not up to snuff for a first-world country either.

[AcerbicZero]

Thanks for the nice "whataboutism" example. Bonus points for obviously being smart enough to get the point, but missing it on purpose just to do the whataboutism routine.

[braythwayt]

Not whataboutism, although I credit it may look that way if you tilt your head and squint.

If someone says, “Trump is a criminal,’ and I say, “Yes, but what about her emails,” that’s the canonical whataboutism. I’m trying to justify Mr. Trump’s wrongdoings and/or deflect from discussing them.

Now consider is someone says, “Mr. Trump is not up to the Ethical standard of US Presidents,’ and I reply, “What about Richard Nixon?”

That has the same words, but a different semantic meaning. I am not saying, “Mr. Trump is fine, because Nixon.’ Nor am I trying to have a long discussion about Nixon that deflects from a discussion about Trump. I’m saying, “Check your presumption that US Presidents have some kind of ethical standard, and here is a counterexample.”