일본에서의 조사의 녹음ㆍ녹화 제도 도입에 대해

This article introduces the arguments for and against the introduction of the interrogation video-recording system in japan, and the report from Legislative Council of the Ministry of Justice that proposes the introduction of the system. In addition to that, this article discusses the problems that will remain after the interrogation video-recording system is implemented. The report from Legislative Council proposes that video recording is required when the police officers and prosecutors interrogate the suspects about the cases that will be tried by “saibanin”trial or that prosecutor’s office investigate independently, that the all interrogations should be recorded from the suspects are arrested, and the that motion to examine the statements of the suspects should be dismissed if the interrogation in which the statements were made was not recorded. This article insists that if the interrogation video-recording system is implemented following this proposal, it will be possible for fact-finders to determine the voluntariness of the statements of the suspects in a condition in which the circumstances of the interrogation are clear, but some problems remain. First the acquisition of the false statements from the suspects cannot be avoided merely by implementation of the video-recording system. It is necessary to expand the right to have an interview with counsel. Second, the theoretical problems, the admissibility of the successive confessions and the derivative evidences that derives from the statements obtained by the breach of the video-recording requirements, should be resolved. Finally, it is feared that the function of the Japanese style interrogation to awaken the criminals the responsibility for the crime at the early stage of the criminal procedure will decline by the implementation of the video-recording system, so it is necessary to develop the alternative methods such as a conflict resolution procedure based on the restorative justice concept.