Ten years have passed since the lay judge or Saiban’in system was introduced in Japan in 2009. Not only did this have a significant impact on the way the criminal court operates, but it also represented an important step in raising the legal consciousness of citizens regarding state affairs. This chapter has three objectives. First, we present a brief history of the varied systems of lay participation adopted in Japan and examine the sociopolitical context in which the most recent system of Saiban’in trial was introduced. Second, we analyze the functioning of the lay judge system in its first decade of operation. Finally, we examine the sociopolitical consequences of the lay judge system in relation to: (a) Saiban’in trials of foreign military personnel stationed in Okinawa; (b) the contribution of the Former Lay Judge Network to calls for the abolition of the death penalty; and (c) the role of former Saiban’in in the 2016 implementation of recording and videotaping of interrogations. We conclude by examining the future of the lay participation system in Japan.

Now that Córdoba has had more than a decade of experience with lay participation in criminal trials, it offers the opportunity to analyze whether the institution of mixed tribunals has fulfilled the expectations held by those who promoted this innovation. This review of the Córdoba experience with mixed tribunals summarizes the main findings of a research program initiated in 2008. It is focused on three issues: the differences between jury and judge decisions and the actual levels of lay participation obtained when judges and juries sit and deliberate together; the tensions between the approaches of professional judges and the social demand for penal harshness associated with fear of crime; and the contribution of lay participation in the courts toward legitimizing the judiciary, a key issue in a society where trust in the justice system has been chronically low. Data sources are varied and include a set of 445 verdicts reached between 2005 and 2017, as well as interviews with judges, judicial clerks, lawyers, and jurors. Data from two public opinion surveys, conducted in 1993 and 2011, were also used to assess the effects of lay participation on the legitimacy of the judiciary.