This paper examines the Japanese correctional system in comparison to the American model, arguing that Japan's approach prioritizes rehabilitation, social restoration, and the cultural practice of apology over retributive or victim-centered justice. The paper explores key features of the Japanese system, including offender classification, suspended sentences, the informal settlement practice of Jidan, volunteer probation officers, Buddhist-influenced vocational training, and incentive-based prison management. It also critically evaluates the system's shortcomings, including victim dissatisfaction, the absence of habeas corpus rights, allegations of prisoner abuse, and the gap between the rehabilitative ideals of prisons and the punitive logic of the judicial process.
The Japanese correctional system places a strong emphasis on rehabilitation and preparing prisoners for reintegration into society. The Japanese correctional system "is intended to resocialize, reform, and rehabilitate offenders" rather than enforce a system of retributive justice along the lines of the American model (Coutsoukis, 2004). This is why most sociologists state that the restorative philosophy of corrections is the predominant approach practiced in Japan — that is, the main aim of the system is to restore the pre-existing social order rather than enact retribution against a particular individual, protect victims' rights, or punish an offender in a strictly proportional manner (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 4).
Much like the American system, Japanese prisoners after conviction are classified "according to gender, nationality, kind of penalty, length of sentence, degree of criminality, and state of physical and mental health," and assigned to an appropriate facility depending on all of these factors (Coutsoukis, 2004). They are then placed in special programs designed to address individual needs, whether those needs involve mental health counseling, anger management, or vocational training. A large number of prisoners are given suspended sentences and placed under the supervision of probation officers rather than sent directly to prison. Those citizens accused of minor offenses who confess and display remorse may be released without further official action (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 4).
In minor cases, there is also a procedure called Jidan — an informal settlement reached outside of court to resolve a victim's claims for damages, "material or emotional, in either civil or penal cases." Jidan involves the victim's "temporary acceptance" of the offender's "expression of apology and offer of material reparations" (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 4). This acceptance of blame echoes the American civil litigation system, where acceptance or refusal of blame may form part of a settlement. However, in Japan, Jidan can take place in criminal and even penal cases, and it is not a formal part of the legal process. It can occur before a trial, but the judge will have access to the Jidan terms of settlement and may take the offender's conduct into consideration when handing down a sentence.
"Jidan is informal in nature but formal in the sense that depending on the circumstances it brings about a suspension of an indictment or lenient sentencing to the defendant" (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 4). For example, a criminal who reaches a Jidan settlement may still be tried and convicted of a serious offense under the law, but receive a less harsh punishment because of his or her willingness to make reparations and offer a formal apology to the victim.
Jidan exemplifies the importance of remorse and the need for symbolic and real efforts of restoration on the part of the offender within the Japanese correctional system. Although offenders with a high risk of recidivism are typically placed under the supervision of professional probation officers upon release, there is also a system of volunteer probation officers — often retirees — for offenders who appear remorseful and thus require a more supportive form of oversight.
Volunteer probation officers, like their professional counterparts, take on responsibility for monitoring the offender's conduct and help him or her build a more positive relationship with society. They are not paid by the state. Both professional and volunteer probation officers serve as surrogate mentors for the offender while also acting in the broader interests of the community, promoting stability and social harmony.
Inside prison, as in the United States, vocational and formal education is offered, as is "instruction in social values," and mental health and cognitive therapy programs are featured in both American and Japanese facilities. Like the United States, convicts in Japan often work, from which "a small stipend is set aside for use on release" (Coutsoukis, 2004). The principles underlying many Japanese prison vocational training programs differ from those found in the West and may be rooted in Buddhist values, in which the acceptance of every individual's imperfections is acknowledged regardless of incarcerated status.
Another distinctive feature of the Japanese system is that prisons operate under a framework of incentives, where "prisoners are initially assigned to community cells, then earn better quarters and additional privileges based on their good behavior" (Coutsoukis, 2004). This is intended to reward good-faith efforts at personal improvement. Throughout the system, punishment of the offender is consistently de-emphasized in favor of forgiveness — on the part of both the victim and Japanese society more broadly.
The behavioral pattern of "apology-forgiveness" seems to be "an ingrained cultural heritage...which serves to make a harmonious, peace-oriented society" (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 2–3). But not everyone is satisfied with this system of justice in Japan. The socially restorative justice emphasis, some allege, "works only for perpetrator and authorities," not the victim (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 4). Although the restorative approach is supposed to be more effective at reducing criminality statistically, the Japanese social order may itself be a contributing factor to this outcome, as Japan's culturally cohesive emphasis tends to discourage criminal behavior generally.
According to a research study of Japanese victims of crime, the mental condition and attitudes of victims after their aggressors had been punished remained disturbed, and "most victims feel very dissatisfied both with the personal apology and material restitution by the perpetrator since most of the restitution and apology are done through a substitute, the professional attorney" (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 4). Victim dissatisfaction is especially marked in the context of the juvenile justice system in Japan. Like America, Japan maintains a separate system of justice for juveniles. "According to juvenile law, the purpose of this is to protect and nurture young offenders. Therefore, judges are obliged to return young offenders back to community" almost regardless of the offense the individual has committed (Hosoi & Nishimura 1999: 6).
"Victims remain dissatisfied; juvenile justice largely favors offenders"
"No habeas corpus; prison abuse complaints go unaddressed"
Hosoi, Yoko & Haruo Nishimura. (1999). "The Role of Apology in the Japanese Criminal Justice System." Paper presented at the Restoration for Victims of Crime Conference. Australian Institute of Criminology. Retrieved 11 Feb 2008 at
You’re 68% through this paper. Sign up to read the remaining 2 sections.
Sign Up Now — Instant Access Already a member? Log inAlways verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.