The purpose of this article to describe is the legislative history for introducing visual recording of interrogation and, second, to analyze the background behind the discussion on the Special Committee for the Criminal Justice under the Legislative Council of the Ministry of Justice. For the purposes, the author, at first, examines the history of mandatory visual recording, so called “Kashi-ka,” and four stages of its reform process. The first stage was the era of glass-route movement. Since 2003, the public opinion of introducing video-recording of police/prosecutor interrogation room has risen. The main body which requested the recording was the Japan Federation of Bar Associations. The second stage was the time around a crisis of the investigation of the Osaka Public Prosecutor Office. It happened in 2010, when the wrongful prosecution against Ms. Muraki, one of the highest officer in the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare, came out into the light. It concerned the fabrication of evidence by a prosecutor. At the time, the public lost the integrity and trustworthiness on the prosecutor office and their investigation. Early 2011, a special committee called by the Ministry of Justice proposed legislation in Japan for mandatory visual recording of prosecutorial interrogation. The third stage was a period of discussion in the Special Committee under the Legislative Council. And the fourth stage would be the time of parliament debate. This article criticizes the bureaucrat led process which is especially notable at the third stage. In January 2013, the Special Committee proposed their original idea, which points to the alternative direction as a legislative bill; their first idea is to introduce mandatory visual recording of only in the mixed-jury trial cases, and the second idea is discretionary video recording by the investigator on site. On the other hand, in the Committee many substitute investigation “tools” have been discussed. The author strongly criticizes this logic as “barter” strategy and proposes setting “innocence commission” in order to find reasons the wrongful conviction in Japan. In conclusion, this article emphasizes that criminal justice reform must be promoted for dismantling future miscarriage of justice.
