List of Issues:

1. Ratification of the Convention against Torture
   
   

   Does the Japanese government plan to ratify in the near future the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment? If not, what are the reasons? Is the universal jurisdiction of the Convention (Articles 5, 6, and 7) an obstacle to ratification?
   
   Does the Japanese government plan to ratify the Convention without reservations and declare recognition of Article 22 on the competence of the Committee against Torture to review individual communications?
   
   

2. Abolishment of Daiyo Kangoku or Substitute Prison
   
   

   (*The Government Report elaborates on Daiyo Kangoku under Article 10)
   
   Are complaints still filed with the court or other authorities because of physical violence to extort confessions in daiyo kangoku or substitute prisons?
   
   Does not it violate Articles 7 and 9 para. 3 of the Covenant that the police may detain a person on one charge as long as 23 days, during which he/she is interrogated for a long period of time, or sometimes suffers violence and threats by the police.?
   
   Following the Committee's 1993 recommendation on this matter, what kind of measures have been taken to rectify the practice to meet the standard of the Covenant?
   
   

3. Ill-Treatment in Criminal Detention
   
   

   Ill-treatment of detainees under criminal detention, in prisons or detention centers, frequently takes place. How have the authorities conducted surveys in response to complaints about such ill-treatment? Are there any plans to provide human rights education for prison officers?
   
   

4. "Protection Cells" and Leather Handcuffs
   
   

   Cases of extreme ill-treatment have been reported, particularly regarding the use of leather handcuffs. A leather-handcuffed detainee cannot help but eat like a dog, and cannot properly manage defecation. Is there no thought within the government that such a degrading punitive device should be abolished?
   
   

5. Disclosure of Prison Rules
   
   

   Directives of the Justice Ministry and prison rules are not disclosed. Why are these rules not publicized in accordance with Paragraphs 29 and 30 of the UN Standard Minimum Rules of the Treatment of Prisoners?
   
   

6. Independent Complaint Mechanisms
   
   

   There are no effective measures that provide remedies for those whose rights were violated in criminal detention. Is there any plan to establish independent complaint mechanisms to which detainees have easy and timely access?

Background:

1. Japan has not ratified the Convention against Torture. The government replied at the Diet that it would positively consider its ratification. However in April 1997 when Mr. Bent Sorensen, member of the Committee against Torture, came to Japan and requested ratification, a Foreign Ministry official responded that it would be difficult to collect evidence as required under the universal jurisdiction, and that thus the effectiveness of the Convention was suspicious. However, it is hardly convincing that a delay in ratification can be justified by such reasons.
   
   Japan should ratify the Convention without any reservations, and declare that it recognizes the individual communication system provided for under Article 22.
   
   
2. Reports of abuse in daiyo kangoku still continue. On May 20, 1998, the Naha District Court found that there was police violence during interrogation and ordered the payment of 200,000 yen in damages. On June 17, 1998, the Osaka District Court ordered the police to pay 300,000 yen in damages. In the judgment the court found that the police detention record was tampered with, and sustained the plaintiff's claim that police officers shoved his head into a bucket filled with water and that they hung him in the air by lifting him by the throat with an arm.
   
   It is a singularly abnormal practice that the police detain a person for as many as 23 days on a single criminal charge. The Government Report emphasizes the improvement of daiyo kangoku facilities (Article 10). However, the problem is not one of facilities but one of the legitimacy of detaining a suspect directly under the control of an investigating agency over a period of several days. Daiyo kangoku is a hotbed of police violence and the infringement of human rights in order to extort confessions, and therefore should be abolished.
   
   
3. Not only domestic NGOs, but also international NGOs, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, have issued a series of reports concerning the ill-treatment of detainees in Japan's criminal detention facilities. Amnesty International reports that prisoners and detainees in police custody were often subjected to systematically cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. It is suspected that detainees who file a lawsuit because of the treatment in the detention facility, or who request to have legal counsel, or who attempt to write letters to the UN Commission of Human Rights are systematically abused, being labeled as "rebellious."
   
   
4. In particular, Amnesty International issued reports in November 1997 and June 1998 disclosing a number of cases in which detainees were badly treated in "protection cells" and cases in which leather handcuffs were used in those cells. It is suspected that "protection cells" and leather handcuffs are used for punishment. There is no law to stipulate conditions for the use of "protection cells." Leather handcuffs are no different from instruments of torture used in the Middle Ages -- they are a punitive device aiming at degrading one's dignity. On January 21, 1998, the Tokyo High Court ruled that the use of leather handcuffs to tie the hands at the back was illegal as it places unnecessary restrictions on physical freedom, disables one from properly managing one's defecation, and forces one to eat like a dog. We request that strict conditions be stipulated by law for the use of "protection cells," and that the use of leather handcuffs be abolished.
   
   
5. It is a great problem that the directives of the Justice Ministry and prison regulations have not been disclosed. The inside rules of prisons that have been obtained by the Japan Federation of Bar Associations and other groups, obligate inmates to have the permission of warders for every detail of their daily lives, such as using a toilet, talking to other prisoners, or wiping one's body in a room, making it difficult to obey the rules in their entirety. Since these rules are not disclosed, even a simple examination of their rationality is hardly possible, and this secrecy is a denial of safeguards against human rights violations.
   
   
6. The greatest cause of continuing human rights violations in Japanese criminal detention centers is the lack of an effective complaints system. The independent machinery of visitors committees, ombudsman, and prison inspectors does not exist in Japan. There are systems of circuit inspectors under the Corrections Bureau of the Justice Ministry, and of petitions to the Minister of Justice, but neither of them is open about its management or run effectively. Judicial remedies for human rights violations are available but ineffective because of time and expense, and also due to the difficulties of proving human rights violations that took place behind closed doors.