Lunch seminar with Miyu Nakata

Confusion over Accomplice Criminal Liability in Japan: the Advantages of the Monistic System of the Principals

Abstract

One of the main objectives in the discussion of accomplice criminal liability is to understand the legislative systems governing it. There are two primary systems: the Complicity System (Beteiligungssystem) and the Monistic System (Einheitstätersystem). In the Complicity System, penalties for criminal acts involving multiple persons are determined systematically, by identifying the form of involvement of each offender, and applying the penalty requirement corresponding to the form of involvement. Conversely, in the Monistic System, penalties for criminal acts involving multiple participants are determined by identifying all participants as principals and basing the sentencing on the degree of contribution each offender made to the crime. The Japanese Penal Code adopts the former approach, while the Danish Penal Code adopts the latter.

Although the Japanese Penal Code and academic theories support the Complicity System, criminal practices in Japan often reflect the Monistic System. In practice, those who play significant roles in the crime are treated as principals, while others are classified as accomplices. Recent data shows that approximately 97.9% of defendants were prosecuted as principals, while only about 2.1% were prosecuted as accomplices. This discrepancy indicates that, despite the nominal adoption of the Complicity System, Japanese criminal practice operates similarly to the Monistic System, causing confusion in the discussion of accomplice liability.

This research aims to resolve this confusion by proposing a new theory that incorporates the flexibility of the Monistic System, aligning sentencing with each participant’s contribution to the crime. A central task is to clarify the substantive content of significant roles necessary to assign principal liability to actors in Japanese accomplice cases. This is because significant roles are recognized differently in various court rulings, leading to a lack of clear definitions. The research methodology includes doctrinal research and systematic case law analysis to elucidate sentencing standards for accomplice cases in Monistic System countries and to compare them with Japanese standards.

Speaker bio

Miyu Nakata is a PhD candidate at the Graduate School of Law, Waseda University, Japan. His area of research is substantive criminal law theory, in particular the doctrines of participation. His research focuses on developing a new theory of complicity that allows for flexible sentencing based on an individual's contribution to a crime. This research aims to propose a new theoretical framework that incorporates the advantages of the monistic system of principals, which allows for flexibility in sentencing according to the individual's contribution to the crime. Therefore, Danish criminal law and Austrian criminal law, where this system is applied, are the subject of comparative law.