From exoneration to execution: Japan fails to learn from historic miscarriage of justice case

In a major blow to Japan’s human rights record, the country has resumed executions after nearly three years, putting Takahiro Shiraishi to death on Friday 27 June 2025. This marked the end of a two-year, 11-month hiatus – the longest pause since the Ministry of Justice began publicly disclosing the names and crimes of death row inmates in 2007. With this execution, Japan has reaffirmed its place within the shrinking group of nations that continue to execute their captive citizens.

Just last September, the acquittal of 89-year-old Hakamada Iwao – once the world’s longest-serving death row inmate after spending nearly 50 years in prison, mostly on death row in solitary confinement with the ever-present threat of execution – threw a harsh spotlight on the systemic flaws in Japan’s criminal justice system. In the aftermath of this egregious miscarriage of justice, Hakamada’s release drew international scrutiny on the continued use of the death penalty in Japan, and it seemed that it might act as a welcome turning point.

A 16-person expert panel made up of legislators, academics and law enforcement officials was convened in response to pressure from the Japan Federation of Bar Associations to consider the country’s use of capital punishment. Their findings, which were presented to Prime Minister Ishiba Shigeru, concluded that Japan’s criminal justice system and use of the death penalty is riddled with problems that can no longer “remain ignored,” warning that it “must not continue in its present form.” 

Yet progress has been slow on advancing an initiative unanimously recommended by the panel, which called for the establishment of an official council under the Diet (Japan’s Parliament) and Cabinet to carry out a comprehensive, government-led review of the death penalty system. The panel further urged that executions should be put on hold until this commission reached its conclusions. Critically, they warned that miscarriages of justice are a real and pressing concern and emphasised the need for greater transparency with the public.

Conditions of death row and executions in Japan remain shrouded in secrecy – but what information is known is routinely met with extensive criticism and places Japan in breach of its obligations under international law. People on death row are kept in solitary confinement and have limited contact with family and people outside of prison. In the case of Hakamada, the emotional damage inflicted by his isolation over more than four decades has affected his ability to communicate. When executions take place, defendants are typically given only a few hours’ notice, and their families are usually informed only after it has taken place. Japan carries out executions by hanging – a method that, as acknowledged by the Osaka District Court in 2011, can take more than two minutes for the person to lose consciousness, during which time they may continue to experience significant pain.

Every five years, the Cabinet Office conducts a national survey on public attitudes toward the death penalty. In the most recent survey, released in March 2025, 83.1% of respondents said the death penalty was “unavoidable.” While the government often cites such figures to justify retaining the death penalty, it continues to withhold most details surrounding executions. This lack of transparency prevents the public from accessing critical information that could substantially inform their views. As a result, public opinion – formed without full awareness of the procedural realities and potential flaws of the system – cannot be reliably used as a legitimate basis for retaining capital punishment.

Additionally, in the national survey approximately 62.2% of respondents endorsing the death penalty cited concern for the feelings of victims and their families as a key rationale. But this justification relies on an oversimplified narrative: victims’ families are not a uniform or static group – their perspectives can differ significantly and may shift over time. In fact, research suggests that the capital punishment process itself can retraumatise bereaved families.[1] Despite the frequent invocation of victims’ feelings in public discourse, there is a lack of robust empirical research into how victims’ families in Japan actually experience and perceive the death penalty. Until such research is undertaken, claims – and indeed reliance on – their views should be approached with caution.

Adding to the controversy, last month’s execution was carried out whilst a constitutional challenge to the practice of executing without adequate notice is pending before the Japanese Supreme Court. A challenge to the legality of hanging is separately making its way through the courts. This decision to execute, especially against the backdrop of these challenges, as well as the recent exposure to a grave miscarriage of justice, is a flagrant violation of Japan’s obligations under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and demonstrates a profound disregard for the rule of law. If the state continues to put people to death, whilst the legality of the system of execution is before the courts and there are calls for a government led review into the death penalty system, Japan is inevitably careering towards the execution of an innocent person.

The Japanese authorities should immediately introduce a moratorium on executions as a first step towards abolishing the death penalty entirely – anything less will continue to damage Japan’s reputation as a country that respects human rights and the rule of law. 

	Saul Lehrfreund is Co-Executive Director of The Death Penalty Project.
	Kate Arthur is Communications Lead at The Death Penalty Project.

[1] See forthcoming research by Dr Amelia Inglis on victims’ families’ experiences of the capital process, to be published by the Death Penalty Project and the Death Penalty Research Unit in September 2025.