Editing Grand jury (section)

===Japan===

After [[World War II]], under the influence of the [[Allies of World War II|Allies]], [[Japan]] passed the Prosecutorial Review Commission Law on July 12, 1948, which created the ''Kensatsu Shinsakai'' (or Prosecutorial Review Commission (PRC) system), analogous to the grand jury system in the United States.<ref>{{Cite journal |last=Fukurai |first=Hiroshi |date=August 4, 2017 |title=The Rebirth of Japan's Petit Quasi-Jury and Grand Jury Systems: A Cross-National Analysis of Legal Consciousness and the Lay Participatory Experience in Japan and the U.S. |url=http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1699&context=cilj |journal=[[Cornell International Law Journal]] |volume=40 |issue=2}}</ref> Until 2009 the PRC's recommendations were not binding, and were only regarded as advisory.<ref name="fukurai-lay-over">{{cite journal |last1=Fukurai |first1=Hiroshi |date=2011 |title=Japan's Prosecutorial Review Commissions: Lay Oversight of the Government's Discretion of Prosecution |url=http://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1049&context=ealr |journal=University of Pennsylvania East Asia Law Review |pages=5–10 |access-date=2 December 2014}}</ref> A survey conducted by the Japanese Cabinet Office in October 1990 showed that 68.8% of surveyed Japanese citizens were not familiar with the PRC system.<ref name="fukurai-lay-over" />{{Relevance inline|date=May 2024}} On May 21, 2009, the Japanese government introduced new legislation which would make the PRC's decisions binding. A PRC is made up of 11 randomly selected citizens, is appointed to a six-month term, and its primary purpose is examining cases prosecutors have chosen not to continue prosecuting.<ref name="Gastil-2014">{{cite journal |last1=Gastil |first1=John |last2=Fukurai |first2=Hiroshi |last3=Anderson |first3=Kent |last4=Nolan |first4=Mark |date=September 13, 2014 |title=Seeing Is Believing: The Impact of Jury Service on Attitudes Toward Legal Institutions and the Implications for International Jury Reform |url=http://www.la1.psu.edu/cas/jurydem/SeeingIsBelieving_20130422100444_919286.pdf |url-status=dead |journal=Court Review |volume=48 |page=126 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150226014327/http://www.la1.psu.edu/cas/jurydem/SeeingIsBelieving_20130422100444_919286.pdf |archive-date=26 February 2015 |access-date=2 December 2014}}</ref> It has therefore been perceived as a way to combat [[misfeasance]] in public officials.<ref name="Fukurai-2011">{{cite journal |last1=Fukurai |first1=Hiroshi |date=January 2011 |title=Japan's Quasi-Jury and Grand Jury Systems as Deliberative Agents of Social Change: De-Colonial Strategies and Deliberative Participatory Democracy |url=http://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3801&context=cklawreview |journal=Chicago-Kent Law Review |volume=86 |issue=2 |page=825 |access-date=2 December 2014}}</ref> This an inverse of American grand juries, as they investigate if a case should be reinstated after being dropped by the prosecution, as opposed to if there is probable cause for changes to be laid in the first place. In this sense, a Japanese PRC functions for the benefit of the one pressing charges, as opposed to being a check on prosecutorial power.

From 1945 to 1972 [[Okinawa Prefecture|Okinawa]] was under American administration. Grand jury proceedings were held in the territory from 1963 until 1972.<ref name="japancivil">{{cite book |last1=Wilson |first1=Matthew J. |title=Japan and Civil Jury Trials: The Convergence of Forces |last2=Fukurai |first2=Hiroshi |last3=Maruta |first3=Takashi |date=October 2015 |publisher=Edward Elgar Publications |isbn=978-1-78347-918-4 |location=Cheltenham, UK |page=134}}</ref> By an ordinance of the civil administration of the [[Ryukyu Islands]] promulgated in 1963, grand jury indictment and petit jury trial were assured for criminal defendants in the civil administration courts.<ref name="japancivil" /> This ordinance reflected the concern of the U.S. Supreme Court<ref>U.S. Supreme Court decision: Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1, 77 S.Ct. 1222, 1 L.Ed.2d 1148 (1957)</ref> that U.S. civilians tried for crimes abroad under tribunals of U.S. provenance should not be shorn of the protections of the U.S. Bill of Rights. Indeed, the District Court in Washington twice held that the absence of the jury system in the civil administration courts in Okinawa invalidated criminal convictions.<ref>District (i.e. federal) court of the District of Columbia decisions: re Nicholson, H.C. 141-61, D.D.C., Nov. 19, 1963, and Ikeda v. McNamara, H.C. 416-62, D.D.C., Oct. 19, 1962</ref><ref>Vanoverbeke. Juries in the Japanese Legal System. 2015. pp [https://books.google.com/books?id=DnsGCAAAQBAJ&pg=PA105 105] & 106.</ref>