[Investigation of verdicts in lawsuits involving competency to stand trial].
In Japan, few discuss the issues concerning competency to stand trial in criminal cases. The author investigated 24 verdicts of Japanese courts addressing this issue. The definition of such competency by the Supreme Court is not sufficiently explicit. Some verdicts have held defendants incompetent for their lack of ability to: communicate; comprehend their situation; understand the details and ramifications of acts of litigation; or comprehend the abstract concept of their right to silence/right against self-incrimination. Others found that the accused had life skills and understood the issues surrounding the lawsuit in both practical and general terms, making the person competent to stand trial. The author examined how the cases were dealt with when the defendants were found incompetent--whether they were suspended or dismissed; how and where defendants were treated psychiatrically--; what was done when the accused dismissed the appeal in a capital case, was suffering from mental disorder induced by detainment; as well as how competency should be regarded before charges are brought, when the transcript of indictment is sent, at the appellate court level, etc. The author also introduced some assessment tools used for assessing competency to stand trial in the United States.
Nakajima
Naoshi
N
Tama-Aoba Hospital. czx00547@nifty.ne.jp
D003416:Criminal Law / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence* / Q000639:trends*; D004185:Disability Evaluation; D005555:Forensic Psychiatry; D006801:Humans; D007298:Insanity Defense; D007564:Japan; D016743:Mental Competency / Q000331:legislation & jurisprudence*; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000175:diagnosis; D014481:United States