WEKO3
アイテム
生命の法的保護の矛盾撞着 (1)―死刑の正当化事由をめぐって―
https://chuo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/9131
https://chuo-u.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/91310e80a371-1ced-4cc7-961f-42d294a5caaa
| 名前 / ファイル | ライセンス | アクション |
|---|---|---|
本文を見る (2.3 MB)
|
|
| Item type | 紀要論文 / Departmental Bulletin Paper(1) | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 公開日 | 2018-10-03 | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | 生命の法的保護の矛盾撞着 (1)―死刑の正当化事由をめぐって― | |||||||||
| タイトル | ||||||||||
| タイトル | The Dilemma of Ultimate Exclusion of Life: Justifiability of the Death Penalty? (1) | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 言語 | ||||||||||
| 言語 | jpn | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | death | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | penalty | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | justification | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | utilitarianism | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | deterrence | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | life imprisonment | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | welfare | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | dignity | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | proportionarity | |||||||||
| キーワード | ||||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 主題Scheme | Other | |||||||||
| 主題 | 1903 penal code | |||||||||
| 資源タイプ | ||||||||||
| 資源タイプ識別子 | http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 | |||||||||
| 資源タイプ | departmental bulletin paper | |||||||||
| 著者 |
長井, 圓
× 長井, 圓
|
|||||||||
| 著者別名(英) | ||||||||||
| 識別子Scheme | WEKO | |||||||||
| 識別子 | 31346 | |||||||||
| 姓名 | NAGAI, Madoka | |||||||||
| 言語 | en | |||||||||
| 抄録 | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Abstract | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | The atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed and injured a multitude of Japanese noncombatants. This cruel murder was committed in the name of ending the war and restoring the peace. The United States maintained that it was necessary for the public welfare and justified both as retribution for Pearl Harbor and deterrence against the kamikaze mentality. That stance, however, was not universally accepted. For example, John Rawls (1995) distinguished “jus ad bello” from “jus in bello” and concluded that the bombings were great wrongs. The same logic of justification of national murder, however, is found in a judgment of the Supreme Court of Japan (March 3, 1948) regarding the acceptability of the death penalty under article 13 of the Constitution. The murder imposed by the death penalty was seen as the ultimate punishment for preservation of the public welfare. It is not clear whether the Court’s conclusion was based on principles of utilitarianism (deterrence) or retribution (deserts). Nonetheless, general and special deterrence would need no more than life imprisonment (with possibility of discretionary release on parole). On the other hand, retribution would require no less than the death penalty. The Penal Code, however, never relies on pure retribution. What is the constitutional basis of “public welfare”? Article 13 sets forth both the dignity of the individual and the public welfare, originating from utilitarianism. Any penalty should involve the minimum evil of compulsion for rehabilitation and the integrity of the community. This doctrine does not always bring effective outcomes. Nevertheless, the nation should do its best, engaging in evidence-based practice. The proportionality of punishment has two aspects. However, the death penalty fails at both the maximum and minimum points. For mass murder, it is not severe enough. So, deterrence is the only practical justification. This inquiry requires us to go back to the discussions of the legislators of our 1903 Penal Code. Are there good reasons to support the death penalty? We shall find better reasons to abolish it. |
|||||||||
| 書誌情報 |
中央ロー・ジャーナル 巻 14, 号 4, p. 53-85, 発行日 2018-03-31 |
|||||||||
| 出版者 | ||||||||||
| 出版者 | 中央ロー・ジャーナル編集委員会 | |||||||||
| ISSN | ||||||||||
| 収録物識別子タイプ | ISSN | |||||||||
| 収録物識別子 | 1349-6239 | |||||||||
| 権利 | ||||||||||
| 権利情報 | この資料の著作権は、資料の著作者または学校法人中央大学に帰属します。著作権法が定める私的利用・引用を超える使用を希望される場合には、掲載誌発行部局へお問い合わせください。 | |||||||||
| フォーマット | ||||||||||
| 内容記述タイプ | Other | |||||||||
| 内容記述 | application/pdf | |||||||||
| 著者版フラグ | ||||||||||
| 出版タイプ | VoR | |||||||||
| 出版タイプResource | http://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85 | |||||||||
