Supreme trip

We TUJ law students were lucky enough to get a guided tour of the Supreme Court of Japan last week, complete with a Q&A session with the most senior of the Supreme Court justices, Justice Hamada, who is very generous with his time with visiting American law students. We were not allowed to take many photographs, but for a virtual tour, you can visit here.

In Japan, the court system is composed of four tiers, 438 summary courts at the bottom level, 50 family courts and 50 district courts next, followed by 8 high courts and the Supreme Court in Tokyo. Supreme Court justices hear two different kinds of appeals: Jokoku appeals, which deal with appeals of the judgments of the lower courts and special criminal appeals; and kokoku appeals, which are issues of the constitutionality of particular legislation. Decisions may be rendered by the Grand Bench, but usually only in cases of very important kokoku appeals. Usually, cases are dealt with by one of the three petty benches (dealing with civil, criminal, and administratie/patent law) with five justices each. The Chief Justice is chosen by the Emperor with the consent of the cabinet and the remaining 14 are appointed by the cabinet but is reviewable by the public by a popular vote after appointment. Ten of the justices must be either lawyers by trade (usually bengoshi that have distinguished themselves by becoming the head of a bar association) or professional judges, prosectors, and law professors. Justices are required to retire by the age of 70.

Justice Hamada was such a nice man, and it was easy to forget that we were speaking with one of the most powerful and influential people in Japan since he had such a calm and easy manner. He spoke a bit about the appeals process and was particularly interested in how the U.S. Supreme Court is able to get away with hearing so few cases, when the Supreme Court of Japan is inundated with appeals, making the work somewhat tedious and very harrying. He also spoke about rendering dissents, and how when he first started, his colleagues wished him good luck by telling him to write a powerful dissent, but since then he noted that it wasn't so great to be involved in a dissent.

Dissenting opinions in Japan are not common or as well respected; however, I was able to ask Justice Hamada about the most interesting case he has been involved with, and he answered that he was actually included in the dissent of a number of voting malapportionment cases. Voting apportionment is a huge deal in Japan, as the method of electing members of the Diet, or the legislature here, is done in such a way that a vote in Hokkaido or in rural Japan can be worth as much as three times as much as a vote in heavily populated Tokyo or Osaka, leading some to contest the constitutionality of such a system. The Supreme Court has overturned some more egregious cases of malapportionment (and has subscribed a 3:1 maximum "vote weight" ratio) but has never invalidated an election.

The Supreme Court buiding itself resembles a post-modern palace of sorts with thick concrete walls and extremely high ceilings. Surprisingly, there are not many photos or paintings of the justices, and very few national symbols of Japan. The artwork is mostly confined to tapestries (see "Sun" and "Moon" tapestries above) and some simple paintings rendering attributes such as wisdom, courage, and compassion, considered to be integral to the justice system, which are hung in the Supreme Court library. My favorite part of the architecture was the huge dome over the Grand Bench.