International Norms, Domestic Politics, and the Death Penalty: Comparing Japan, South Korea, and Taiwan

Abstract

Why do countries with similar cultures and political institutions respond differently to international norms? The varied responses among East Asian democracies to the growing international movement to abolish the death penalty show that while Taiwan and South Korea have moved closer to embracing the international human rights norm, Japan has been more resistant. The movement in Taiwan and South Korea toward a moratorium on capital punishment has little to do with public opinion, which generally favors retaining the death penalty. Rather, it reflects specific domestic political contexts, especially the power and autonomy of the executive and the experience of a drastic regime change, that open the way for rethinking human rights norms.

The death penalty in a changing society: a survey of recent developments in Japan

“…The dominant themes still tend to be: how steps to keep the death penalty lowkey are taken by the Japanese authorities to extremes not known in other countries (Johnson 2005(Johnson , 2006a(Johnson , 2006bMcNeil and Mason 2007); how erroneous myths continue to be held with regards to the death penalty, such as that it deters crime (Hamai 2009), or that the method that has been used for decades of hanging is pain-free (Nagata 2013); and, how successful Japan is in resisting pressure to adopt the international norm of death penalty abolition (Bae 2011), or what the social foundation of the death penalty system is in this country (Wang 2005). There are some studies that do engage in a discussion about the death penalty that relates to recent social, legal, and political developments, such as, for example, Johnson (2010), Satō (2010), andFukui (2011), which analyze the appropriateness of entrusting laymen, through the new so-called quasi-jury system (saiban'in seido), with the decision of whether to hand down the death penalty, or Ogura (2011), which reflects on what is likely to become of the death penalty debate in Japan now that all fugitives in the Aum case have been apprehended.…”

Cause Lawyering and Movement Tactics: Disability Rights Movements in South Korea and Japan

“…Admittedly, Korea remained a centralized presidential system, while Japan had moved through a series of weak prime ministers. Bae () argues that Japan's lack of both a strong executive and regime change explains why the emerging norm of abolishing the death penalty took hold in Korea but not in Japan. However, the DPJ's Upper House victory in 2007 initiated in Japan a rare period of real party competition, which is usually fiercer in Korea and makes governments more responsive (Lee ).…”

Support for the Death Penalty in Taiwan?: a Study of Value Conflict and Ambivalence

“…In Taiwan, some 50 crimes are death penalty eligible, only 20 of which involve offences relating to loss of life. Table 1 provides a breakdown of Taiwan's death sentence and execution data between 1992 and 2018 and since 2010, there have been in excess of 30 executions (Bae 2011;Jen 2015). Until the late 1990s, Taiwan conducted more executions per capita than the USA, but following the move from one-party rule in 2001, executions rapidly declined (Johnson and Zimring 2009).…”

“…Public opinion may influence public policy; in China, public opinion is often cited as a prime justification for retention (see Jiang 2015; but also see Bakken 2013;Wang 2015). There is certainly evidence on the significance of public opinion for policy-making in Taiwan itself (Bae 2011;Jen 2015). Yet, no doubt extended quantitative and qualitative comparative work needs to be undertaken to understand how unpopular norms become adopted elsewhere (Sarat and Boulanger 2005;Greenberg and West 2008).…”

“…Yet, no doubt extended quantitative and qualitative comparative work needs to be undertaken to understand how unpopular norms become adopted elsewhere (Sarat and Boulanger 2005;Greenberg and West 2008). Strong popular opinion in support of the death penalty ('our people want this') around East Asia has so far produced differing outcomes in terms of policy reforms that embrace international human rights norms-with Taiwan more actively embracing such reform on the death penalty than, for example, Japan ( Bae 2011;Sato 2018). However, on global policy shifts, we agree with Greenberg and West's well evidenced cross-sectional study of 193 countries that 'the circumstances that have favoured elimination may not ever develop in some countries, and where they do, they may not produce the same outcomes as they have in Western Europe.'…”