An Empirical Comparative Study of the Prosecution Process in Japan and France

本研究的重点是日本和法国的起诉程序。这些数据主要是通过采访日本的检察官获得的，而在法国则是通过直接观察和采访检察官和调查法官获得的。在法国，审判前的调查由检察官和调查法官共同进行，后者处理需要进一步调查的“罪行”和“违法行为”，而前者处理所有其他案件。警察与检察官密切合作，检察官直接向警察下达指示。检察官根据司法部规定的标准行使裁量权，决定案件的撤销、中止和起诉。检察官的决定很快，而调查法官的决定需要6个月到1年才能完成调查。法官的审前调查似乎是一个真正的事实发现过程，而审判则是公开确认或在少数情况下拒绝调查法官决定的场合。在检察官起诉的案件中，供词率似乎很高，辩方律师依靠检方提供的档案。除了日本警察的机构独立性和审判的对抗性结构外，日本同行的角色表现似乎非常相似。

This research focuses on the prosecution process in Japan and France. The data were obtained mainly by interviews of prosecutors in Japan, while they were obtained by direct observations and interviews of prosecutors and investigating judges in France. In France, the pre-trial investigation is shared by the prosecutors and the investigating judges, the latter handling "crimes" and "delits" which require further investigations, while the former handling all the others. The police work closely with the prosecutors, who give immediate instructions to the former. The prosecutors exercise the discretionary power to decide the dismissal, suspension and prosecution of cases, according to the criteria given by the Ministry of Justice. The decision of the prosecutor is quick, while that of the investigating judge requires six months to a year before completing investigation. The pre-trial investigation by the judge seems a real fact finding process, while trial is an occasion to confirm or, in a few cases, reject the decision of the investigating judge in public. In cases prosecuted by the prosecutors, the confession rate seems high and the defense counsel relies on the dossier which was produced by the prosecution side. The role performances of the Japanese counterparts seem to be very similar, except for the institutional independence of the police and the adversarial structure of trial in Japan.