Lawrence Repeta Official Web Site

This is a book review of a collection of writings on fundamental human rights issues written by experts who have been deeply involved in human rights issues at international organizations.

Makoto Ibusuki / Lawrence Repeta This article describes new developments regarding access to legal counsel during the pretrial stage, the recent trend toward a decline in pretrial detention, and the movement by bar associations to regulate interrogations of suspects. The main reason for the decline in detentions is believed to be the proactive efforts of defense lawyers, who frequently challenge court detention orders, and judges who are more willing to accept such challenges and release suspects from physical custody.

In Japan, there are opinions that the Japanese Constitution should be amended to add provisions that give special powers to the Cabinet in emergency situations to prevent COVID-19 infection. However, such provisions are not necessary in the current Constitution. Here we introduce judicial decisions on lockdowns in the United States.

Constitution Article 41provides the government with sufficient power to take aggressive action SEATTLE – Many foreign observers are puzzled by Japan’s odd response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which some call a “soft lockdown.” After dithering for weeks, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe finally exercised power granted under the recently revised New Influenza Special Measures Act to declare a state of emergency on April 7 over Tokyo and six other prefectures, authorizing prefectural governors to request social-distancing measures and other actions.

According to the provisions of the Constitution, anyone can observe trials held in courts across the country, but it was only during the Heisei era that spectators were allowed to freely take notes in the courtroom. Until then, permission was required, and it was rarely actually allowed. The catalyst for this change was a lawsuit filed by an American lawyer.

The Tokyo District Court has almost never used a system for permanently preserving records of important civil lawsuits, resulting in the disposal of many well-known lawsuit records. This has led to criticism from experts that the court has "lacked the awareness that it is making history," as it appears to have neglected "the nation's shared property."