Yamagami Sentencing Reveals Japan’s Troubled Response to Religious Cults
Published By admin
On January 21, Yamagami Tetsuya was sentenced to life imprisonment for the July 2022 murder of former Prime Minister Abe Shinzō. Courts typically exercise judicial discretion in sentencing, departing from what prosecutors demand, but in an unusual move, the Nara District Court followed the prosecution’s recommendation in full in passing down punishment.
One factor that made this case different was the array of charges Yamagami faced. Along with the main charge of murder, Yamagami was also tried for violating Japanese laws prohibiting the possession, manufacture, and discharge of firearms, as well as property damage. The defense attempted to win acquittal on the firearms and weapons manufacturing counts, arguing that Yamagami’s homemade weapon did not fall under applicable statutes. Acquittal on these counts would have bolstered their case for limiting sentencing to no more than 20 years, but the court rebuffed this line of argument, clearing the way for a harsher punishment.
Another factor was Yamagami’s perceived unrepentance. In cases where a court grants the prosecution its sentencing request, the judge will typically consider the defendant as not having shown adequate remorse or not apologizing for the crime. In passing judgement on Yamagami, the bench noted that he had demonstrated neither an understanding of the danger of his actions nor the gravity of taking another human’s life, and so could not be said to have reached a sufficient level of remorse.
While Yamagami did express regret, the court in coming to its decision seems to have put greater weight on both his failure to apologize directly to Abe’s widow Akie and to make any attempt to atone for the killing, such as through financial restitution.
Defendant’s Background Dismissed
Another critical point in Yamagami’s sentence was the court brushing aside his troubled background as a second-generation follower of the Unification Church, which was central to the defense’s case. The ruling acknowledged that Yamagami, who stated that his motive stemmed from the financial duress his family suffered at the hands of the UC, may have “harbored intense anger” toward the organization and its affiliates (including politicians like Abe, whom he viewed as having supported the church) and a desire to make them suffer, but it stressed that there was “a significant leap” between those feelings and planning and carrying out murder with a homemade weapon. Judging the leap too great, the court dismissed the defendant’s upbringing as not having a substantial influence on his crime.
This was a surprising development given the growing understanding of how childhood trauma can profoundly influence the trajectory of a person’s life. This connection is particularly relevant in lawsuits by second-generation followers against religious groups like the UC, as demonstrating the long-lasting effects of adverse childhood experiences enables claimants to win greater compensation for their suffering.
At the heart of Yamagami’s case was his decision to assassinate the former prime minister rather than directing his deep-seated resentment at the UC itself, or its leaders. Abe had connections to the Unification Church, and the court weighed whether the killing was a leap too far or an inevitable outcome of childhood trauma, with the judge ultimately choosing the former. A likely factor in this outcome was the failure of the defense to present expert testimony from psychiatrists or other mental health experts in order to clearly link the suffering inflicted on Yamagami by the church during his formative years with his later crime.
Content retrieved from: https://www.nippon.com/en/in-depth/d01205/.
