NCJ Number
209546
Journal
Criminal Justice Ethics Volume: 23 Issue: 2 Dated: Summer/Fall 2004 Pages: 14-24
Date Published
2004
Length
11 pages
Annotation
This article examines the works of prominent authors and others in considering the positives and negatives in the practice of comparative criminology, specifically Western criminologists’ study of foreign criminal justice systems and their obsession with, not only Japan’s low crime rates, but the relationship between Japanese culture and attitudes toward crime and criminality, regarded as the criminal justice utopia.
Abstract
Western criminologists have shown a marked tendency to assign certain countries well-defined roles when engaging in comparative analysis. Depending on the particular issue at hand or the ideological or political persuasions, many criminologists seem to have a ready-made list of countries from which they pick as suitable examples when a comparative analysis seems appropriate or helpful to their cause. Over many years, Western criminologists have given much attention, to the extent of idealization, to Japan’s low crime rates, which has developed into a more focused interest in the relationship between Japanese culture and attitudes toward crime and criminality. Japan is being regarded as some type of a criminal justice utopia. In this article, prominent authors, such as David Bayley and John Braithwaite, against a new study of Japanese prosecutors examine whether in attempting to understand Japan’s experience of crime and criminal justice, Western criminologists have been guilty of idealizing the other. The past works of Bayley and Braithwaite have served to legitimize a form of Orientalism, producing a distorted, narrow-minded vision of Japan within Western criminology. With the publication of new works over the past 2 years, there is hope for the beginning of a new direction in comparative criminology, leading to an appreciation of the real Japan as opposed to being preoccupied with an elusive myth. 39 Notes