Abstract:

In this paper the discussion centers from a Japanese perspective on criminal liability for penal and committee decisions and whether organizational faults, where the responsible person can hardly be detected, can result in criminal liability of the individual actor or of the panel, committee, or organization as a whole. Hereto two decisions of the Japanese Supreme Court are explained and discussed. The cases concern panel decision making procedures in two different ways: Case 1 deals with issues of a necessary recall from market of contaminated blood products with HIV (so called: Midori-juji-case). Case 2 deals with wrongly dispatched cars lacking tyre stability (so called Mitsubishi-moter-case). In both cases it is questionable, when and how the manufacturer is criminally responsible for effects, like severe woundings and killings, caused by wrongly dispatched (and not recalled) products. A core legal question hereto seems to be, whether the manufacturer can foresee effects by not recalling products. Hence this is still vague in practice. The question is taken to the legal scholar to explain the concept and doctrine of perpetration and participation, and accomplice in cases of recklessness, where the individual actor may not be detected.

Keywords: