Need Help?

The Asian Criminological Society 12th Annual Conference (ACS2020), hosted by Ryukoku University, was held online for four days from June 18 to 21, 2021. The purpose of the conference, the second of its kind to be held in Japan after the 2014 Osaka conference, was to promote the growth of criminology in Asia and Oceania, and to promote academic exchange with advanced regions of criminology such as the United States and Europe.
>> ACS2020 Program　https://acs2020.org/program.html
The overall theme of the conference is "Crime and Punishment under Asian Cultures: Tradition and Innovation in Criminology". The aim was to promote understanding of the social systems and culture and measures against crime and delinquency in Japan, which is said to be "the country with the least crime in the world".

The following is a summary of the Plenary Session with Q&A Session, which was held live streaming at the conference.

Summary of the Q&A Session

Question 1: Why has there been no movement towards abolition of the death penalty in Asia?
Answer 1: Almost no European countries (with the exception of Belarus) have the death penalty. "Abolition of the death penalty" is a prerequisite for membership in the EU and for becoming a member state of the Council of Europe. Compared to Europe, Asian countries seem to lack incentives for abolishing the death penalty, as well as strong organizations to address the issue and lead the movement to abolish the death penalty across national borders. Incidentally aside, Brexit, which occurred in 2020, had no impact on policies regarding the death penalty.

Question 2: What are the differences between international organizations (Amnesty, EU, etc.) and domestic NGOs?
Answer 2: An international organization cannot lead an abolition movement on its own. There are two stages to how a transnational norm (abolition of the death penalty) is transformed, localized, and internalized: (1) rhetorical introduction, and (2) the process of localization and internalization. International organizations may be able to play a role in stage (1).

Question 3: What are some possible strategies for gaining support for the abolition of the death penalty in Asian countries?
Answer 3: In Asian countries, there are problems such as a lack of data, and rhetoric surrounding the "War on Drugs.'' Therefore, if we want to abolish the death penalty, it is important to enable universities and organizations to collect research and data, which can then be used for advocacy. Collecting as much data as possible through research and studies will make the advocacy more scientific (evidence-based).
On the issue of the death penalty, it is particularly important to look at drug policies in Asia. The Eleos Justice Institute at Monash University provides a platform for connecting various Asian human rights NGOs and conducting collaborative research. I would like to discuss this in the next session [Round Table 01], "Politics of Death Penalty Abolition and Retention in Asia" (June 21, 2021, 13:00-14:30 [Chair: Mai Sato]). I would also like to discuss this in my presentation, "Politics of Death Penalty Abolition and Retention in Asia" on June 21, 2021.
The discourse on "false convictions," which is used to move toward abolition of the death penalty, has been very influential in dissuading American citizens from supporting the death penalty. However, there is some doubt as to whether it will be a powerful discourse in Asian countries.

Question 4: In my discussions with students, I feel that "innocence" is very influential in advancing the debate on abolishing the death penalty. I believe that the discourse surrounding the abolition of the death penalty will change in the future, but at present, there is a lack of information on the death penalty in Japan. I believe that more information should be disseminated.
Answer 4: I agree that the discourse on "innocence" is influential in Japan. According to a public opinion survey on "Attitudes toward the Death Penalty System" conducted by the Cabinet Office, the problem of miscarriages of justice ("When there is a mistake in a trial, if the death penalty is imposed, it cannot be undone") is one of the top reasons why people want to abolish the death penalty. However, it can be said that this is because the criminal justice system is believed to be "safe" to some extent in Japan. In some Asian countries, people's trust in the criminal justice system is low. Even if the "innocence" argument is used in such countries, it is unlikely to be persuasive because people will think, "The criminal justice system is already broken, so it is natural that false convictions will occur."

Question 5: The reality is that sexual minorities are being "killed" by the state (government). In Japan, however, discussions linking sexual minorities to the death penalty and "killings by the state (government)" have been slow to develop.
Answer 5: In Japan, homosexuality is not criminalized in the first place. However, there seems to be little awareness that the debate over "LGBTQI" is a human rights issue. The Japanese government will probably say that the death penalty should not be applied to homosexual acts. It is meaningful with regard to discrimination against sexual minorities that Japan, a country with the death penalty, makes such a statement. It is more persuasive than a country that abolishes the death penalty appealing to a country that has the death penalty to abolish it. I think it is an effective way to reduce the number of countries with the death penalty.
In the following "State-Sanctioned Killing of Sexual Minorities" report, there is a report on the murder of Alireza Fazeli Monfe'ad in Iran (a case in which Ali, a homosexual, was murdered by his relatives).
Please refer to it.
https://bridges.monash.edu/articles/report/State-Sanctioned_Killing_of_Sexual_Minorities_Looking_Beyond_the_Death_Penalty/14069318/3

Keynote session by Prof. David Garland, "What's Wrong with Penal Populism?" As discussed in “What's wrong with ‘penal populism’? Politics, the public, and penological expertise”, criminologists do not have the power to influence government decisions, but they can research and provide evidence on the death penalty and penal system. The issue of sexual minorities and the death penalty is not fully theoretically explained or discussed at this stage, but it will be an important issue to be discussed at the meta-level in the future.

Question 6: In countries where it is difficult to collect information and data, how will you collect the information/data?
Answer 6: It is true that in some countries where the death penalty exists, even data collection is difficult and academic freedom is not guaranteed. However, researchers are making an effort and are collecting data in their own way. For example, activists in Bangladesh are collecting information on the number of "extrajudicial killings" (immediate executions). The details will be discussed in the next roundtable.
Please refer to the following website for more information.
https://www.monash.edu/law/research/eleos/events
https://www.eventbrite.com.au/e/in-conversation-with-professor-william-schabas-tickets-151594359811

The Asian Criminological Society 12th Annual Conference (ACS2020), hosted by Ryukoku University, was held online for four days from June 18 to 21, 2021. The purpose of the conference, the second of its kind to be held in Japan after the 2014 Osaka conference, was to promote the growth of criminology in Asia and Oceania, and to promote academic exchange with advanced regions of criminology such as the United States and Europe.
>> ACS2020 Program　https://acs2020.org/program.html
The overall theme of the conference is "Crime and Punishment under Asian Cultures: Tradition and Innovation in Criminology". The aim was to promote understanding of the social systems and culture and measures against crime and delinquency in Japan, which is said to be "the country with the least crime in the world".

The following is a summary of the Plenary Session with Q&A Session, which was held live streaming at the conference.

Summary of the Q&A Session

Question 1: The fact that you have interviewed prisoners in China is surprising in itself. Interviewing prisoners is not an easy task even in a country with a low authoritarian character. I would like you to explain how you gained access.
Answer 1: It was indeed a difficult survey and required a great deal of commitment, determination, hard work, and luck. I was a member of the Center for the Rule of Law organized by the local government in the study area, and this study was part of a larger one on the situation of migrant workers, which was funded by the local government. In addition, I had been involved in criminal justice for more than ten years before coming to the UK, and I was also a lawyer, so I had contacts and was trusted. Also, the prison had a women's facility, which was ideal for the research. However, the sample size had to be reduced, and the interviews were always tense because of the possibility that they might be stopped at any moment. Moreover, the prison was located in a remote mountainous area, and it was difficult to drive there at night when there was no lighting.

Question 2: You state that the pyramid scheme crimes of the two female inmates you interviewed were "investment activities". What were they investing in? Who created the organization? Were they punished?
Answer 2: The investment targets could be as diverse as health-related products, real estate, or even an island somewhere, but in reality, there was no investment activity going on, and the only purpose was to collect funds from new members. However, it was a normal company in appearance and internal organization, with a receptionist, marketing department, legal department, etc., and the female inmates were not aware that they were operating in an illegal organization at all. There is no established legal interpretation as to what kind of behavior is punishable, and if they engaged in any kind of managerial activity, they could be punished as organizers. Those at the top of the organization have been punished for fraud as well.

Question 3: The female inmates were not aware that their pyramid scheme activity was a crime, but is it possible that they chose this crime over other criminal activities?
Answer 3: The female inmates are first-time offenders, and their participation in the pyramid scheme was not a choice they made in comparison to other crimes, since they believed they had joined a normal company. They may have been aware that they had crossed some boundaries, but they were not aware that they had chosen to commit criminal acts.

Question 4: The two women have been convicted of recruiting new members into the organization, but how long is the sentence? In Japan, the penalty is imprisonment for not more than 3 years or a fine of not more than 3 million yen, or both, for those who established and operated the organization; imprisonment for not more than 1 year or a fine of not more than 300,000 yen for those who recruited as a business; and a fine of not more than 200,000 yen for those who simply recruited. Have they already been released? If they have been released, have they returned to their hometowns?
Answer 4: Under Chinese law, a person who organizes a pyramid scheme organization that results in serious circumstances, such as confinement or suicide, can be sentenced to a fixed term of five years or more and fined, while a person who merely solicited without such serious results can be sentenced to a fixed term of five years or less and fined. One of the women I interviewed was sentenced to six months, and the other to one year. I believe they have already been released, but I cannot get any information about them after their release. However, according to the interviews, they were very confident in their abilities and wanted to take a chance in the city instead of going back home. One in particular had even become a certified public accountant while working for her organization. The idea that one must succeed on one's own is truly neoliberal.

Question 5: It seems clear that the root of the problem lies in the family registration system. Japan also has a family registration system, but it is not a system that restricts social welfare or economic and social opportunities as in China. Has the Chinese government taken any measures to address this situation?
Answer 5: The Chinese government is aware of the problem, but since it does not have the power to help all migrant workers from rural areas, it only takes measures for those with a certain level of education and economic power. It does not cover the less-educated like these women or those from lower-ranked universities.

Question 6: Their behavior could be explained by strain theory, but if they learned the modus operandi, etc., after joining the organization, then differential association theory could also apply.
Answer 6: I think strain theory is more appropriate because these women were not aware that they were doing anything illegal at all. They thought that they were conducting the business of a legitimate company and had no knowledge of the criminal behavior.

Question 7: The reason for their actions might not be neoliberalism, but rather traditional Chinese culture.
Answer 7: The idea that economic success takes precedence over everything else is a product of post-1970’s reforms, and is not at all based on traditional culture. Today, neoliberal ideas are widely shared by the socially disadvantaged, who generally believe that it is their responsibility to improve their own situation and that they should not burden the government, and that they should accept their own unfavorable situation. It is highly unlikely that such a social structure will change in the near future.

The Asian Criminological Society 12th Annual Conference (ACS2020), hosted by Ryukoku University, was held online for four days from June 18 to 21, 2021. The purpose of the conference, the second of its kind to be held in Japan after the 2014 Osaka conference, was to promote the growth of criminology in Asia and Oceania, and to promote academic exchange with advanced regions of criminology such as the United States and Europe.
>> ACS2020 Program　https://acs2020.org/program.html
The overall theme of the conference is "Crime and Punishment under Asian Cultures: Tradition and Innovation in Criminology". The aim was to promote understanding of the social systems and culture and measures against crime and delinquency in Japan, which is said to be "the country with the least crime in the world".

The following is a summary of the Keynote Session with Q&A Session, which was held live streaming at the conference.

Summary of the Q&A Session

Question 1: Does "cybercrime” include hate speech?
Answer 1: Yes, it does. “Cybercrime” includes cyber deviant behavior and cyber perpetration. Sending annoying or obscene messages may relate to hate speech.

Question 2: How old are children when they start to gain access to computers in Hong Kong?
Answer 2: In Hong Kong, children are allowed to use computers in primary school at age of 6. They are encouraged to use computers or iPads to study at home or when handing in homework. During the Covid pandemic, many schools are in lock down so nearly everybody has access to computer or iPad. Government or local organization provided financial support to ensure children’s access to computers. Many professionals are now advising parents to keep computers in the dining room where parents can monitor what children are browsing on the internet. Younger people are vulnerable to information on the internet and cannot avoid cyber victimization. Cyber-perpetrators are very clever and younger people are not aware of all the tricks they use. Parents should discuss with children about all the potential dangers of internet. They should remember and share all the cases around the world and talk with children and inform them.

Question 3: Have traditional crimes been decreasing and cybercrime increasing in Hong Kong?
Answer 3: The overall number of juvenile delinquency has decreased in Hong Kong. Younger people are staying at home and communicate through cyberspace. They seldom go out to the streets, so now major delinquent crimes are cybercrime and drug-taking.

Question 4: In what way is cybercrime different in Asia or Hong Kong?
Answer 4: I have read articles published elsewhere but do not think there is much difference around the world. A lot of young people call themselves “global citizens”. When they play and communicate on the internet, while there are still differences, they also share a similar culture. Cybercrime perpetration and victimizations are similar as well. However, moral disengagement is common in Asians, which leads to more use of the internet and more vulnerability to becoming victims. The Western world has more liberal parental monitoring and higher sense of cyber security. Is there a cultural bias among various countries? I am sure there is. For example, hate crime is not common in Hong Kong, Taiwan, or mainland China, because the overall population is composed mainly of Chinese people. So-called racial discrimination is not very serious in much of China. On the other hand, in the U.S. or Europe, there is more cultural migration and mixing of different races, so cultural bias might be more common. This may be an issue. Oriental culture is more collective and Western is more individualistic. Thus in Asia, interventions or restrictions are more authoritarian. There is a cultural difference. Cybercrime is transnational and transcends culture. However, since there are cultural differences, transnational cooperation between countries is very difficult.

Question 5: Are online grooming and sexting illegal in Hong Kong? They are not illegal in Japan.
Answer 5: Legislations in Hong Kong are outdated. There is no law on specific online related or cyber related legislation in Hong Kong. There is only a traditional set of law or ordinance. Thus, there is a growing voice for legislation on cybercrime. For example, in a case of online grooming, police will  you with “illegal use of a computer” since there is no specific legislation. Everything can be grouped as “illegal use of a computer.” If you hire a good lawyer and argue this loophole, you might escape charges.

The Asian Criminological Society 12th Annual Conference (ACS2020), hosted by Ryukoku University, was held online for four days from June 18 to 21, 2021. The purpose of the conference, the second of its kind to be held in Japan after the 2014 Osaka conference, was to promote the growth of criminology in Asia and Oceania, and to promote academic exchange with advanced regions of criminology such as the United States and Europe.
>> ACS2020 Program　https://acs2020.org/program.html
The overall theme of the conference is "Crime and Punishment under Asian Cultures: Tradition and Innovation in Criminology". The aim was to promote understanding of the social systems and culture and measures against crime and delinquency in Japan, which is said to be "the country with the least crime in the world".

The following is a summary of the Keynote Session with Q&A Session, which was held live streaming at the conference.

Summary of the Q&A Session

Question 1: Since the spread of the COVID-19 outbreak, has police legitimacy decreased due to issues related to police impartiality, as typified by Black Lives Matter? Also, during this period, did public confidence in the police increase or decrease?
Answer 1: Within Australia, police legitimacy seems to be on the rise. The police in Australia do not take a hard line on public health issues and work very well with the community. For example, instead of cracking down on people who are violating the requirement to wear masks, they hand out masks on the spot, and very few people have actually been fined. Also, although this is only in Australia, the research has shown that public confidence in the police has increased.

Question 2: How does procedural justice increase cooperation by citizens?
Answer 2: Our research has shown that the most important element of policing in terms of procedural justice is giving citizens a voice. Treating citizens with dignity and respect, taking a neutral stance in decision-making, and making sure that the subject understands that he or she is not being targeted for policing are equally fundamental elements, but giving citizens a voice is at the root of it. This is illustrated for example by taking the stance of asking people if there is something wrong with them, rather than being coercive, such as indicating the possibility of a fine to someone who is not wearing a mask for example.

Question 3: Does the degree of public confidence vary across groups?
Answer 3: We cannot answer this question with the data we have, but there is definitely a difference. The results of other studies we have conducted show significant differences by ethnic background.

Question 4: What is the direction of causality among the concepts of procedural justice, police legitimacy, and public confidence?
Answer 4: Although it has been shown that these concepts are interrelated, the mechanism by which they are established is unclear. This is an important research topic that should be addressed through experimental and longitudinal studies that can take into account time series. However, this does not mean that policing should be underestimated. Police can be effective in their practice by treating citizens with dignity and respect, and by building public trust and confidence in themselves.