Code of Criminal Procedure

The territorial jurisdiction of courts is determined by the place where the crime was committed, the place where the domicile or the residence of the defendant is located, or the place where the defendant is at present.

With respect to crimes committed on board a Japanese vessel while outside Japanese territory, the territorial jurisdiction will be determined, in addition to the places prescribed in the preceding paragraph, by the place of the port of registry of such vessel or the place of the port of call after said crime was committed.

With respect to crimes committed in a Japanese aircraft while outside Japanese territory, the territorial jurisdiction will be determined, in addition to the places prescribed in paragraph (1), by the place where such aircraft lands (including landing on water) after the crime was committed.

If two or more related cases fall under the subject-matter jurisdiction of different courts, a higher court may jointly exercise jurisdiction over all of said cases.

If a case falls under special jurisdiction of a high court and other cases are related to said case, the high court may jointly exercise jurisdiction over all of said cases.

If two or more related cases falling under the subject-matter jurisdiction of different courts are pending before a higher court and there is any case which need not be jointly tried, the higher court may make a ruling to transfer such case to a lower court which has jurisdiction over it.

If two or more related cases are separately pending before a higher court and a lower court, the higher court may, irrespective of the subject-matter jurisdiction, make a ruling to jointly try the case falling under the jurisdiction of the lower court.

If a case falling under the special jurisdiction of a high court is pending before it and a related case is pending before a lower court, the high court may make a ruling to jointly try the case falling under the jurisdiction of the lower court.

If two or more cases falling under the territorial jurisdiction of different courts are related to each other, any court which has jurisdiction over one of these cases may exercise jurisdiction over the other cases jointly; provided, however, that such court may not exercise jurisdiction over a case which falls under the jurisdiction of a particular court pursuant to the provisions of other acts.

If two or more related cases falling under the territorial jurisdiction of different courts are pending before one court and there is any case which need not be jointly tried, the court may make a ruling to transfer such case to another court which has jurisdiction over it.

If two or more related cases are separately pending before different courts which have the same subject-matter jurisdiction, each court may, upon the request of a public prosecutor or the defendant, make a ruling that they are jointly tried in one court.

If the rulings of several courts as given in the preceding paragraph have not come to an accord, the next higher court common to all of these courts may, upon the request of a public prosecutor or the defendant, make a ruling that the cases are to be jointly tried in one court.

Two or more cases are deemed to be related when:

one person has committed several crimes;

several persons have committed the same crime or several separate crimes together;

several persons have conspired with each other, and each of them has committed crimes separately.

The crimes of harboring criminals, tampering with evidence, perjury, giving false expert evidence or interpretation and crimes concerning property obtained through a property crime will be deemed to have been committed together with a crime committed by the principal offender.

When the same case is pending before several courts differing in subject-matter jurisdiction, said case will be tried by a higher court.

The higher court may, upon the request of a public prosecutor or the defendant, make a ruling that a lower court which has jurisdiction over the case tries said case.

When the same case is pending before several courts which have the same subject-matter jurisdiction, said case will be tried by the court in which prosecution was first instituted.

The next higher court common to all of these courts may, upon the request of a public prosecutor or the defendant, make a ruling that the case is tried by a court in which prosecution was later instituted.

When it is necessary for the purpose of discovering facts, a court may execute its duties outside the district under its jurisdiction.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph apply mutatis mutandis to commissioned judges.

Court proceedings do not lose their effect due to lacking jurisdiction.

In cases requiring urgency, a court may, even when it has no jurisdiction, take the measures necessary for the discovery of facts.

The provisions of the preceding paragraph apply mutatis mutandis to commissioned judges.

A public prosecutor must request the next higher court common to all of the relevant courts of first instance to designate the court which is to have jurisdiction when:

the competent court of jurisdiction cannot be determined since the jurisdictional district is not clear;

there is no other court with jurisdiction over a case with respect to which a decision that a certain court lacks jurisdiction has become final.

When no court has jurisdiction under law, or when it is impossible to ascertain such court, the Prosecutor-General must request the Supreme Court to designate the court which is to have jurisdiction.

A public prosecutor must request the next higher court of the court concerned to effect a change of jurisdiction when:

the competent court is unable to exercise its jurisdiction owing to legal reasons or special circumstances;

there is a concern that the impartiality of the trial cannot be maintained owing to the general sentiment of the local people in the district, the state of the proceedings, or due to any other circumstances.

In the cases prescribed in each of the items of the preceding paragraph, the defendant may also request a change of jurisdiction.

If, owing to the nature of the crime, the general sentiment of the local people in the district, or due to any other circumstances, there is a concern that public safety will be disrupted if the case were to be tried by the court which has jurisdiction over it, the Prosecutor-General must request the Supreme Court to effect a change of jurisdiction.

When a court deems it appropriate, the court may rule to, either upon the request of a public prosecutor or the defendant, or ex officio, transfer a case under its jurisdiction to another competent court which has the same subject-matter jurisdiction.

The ruling of a transfer may not be made once examination of the evidence for the case has commenced.

Only when a ruling in favor of a transfer or a ruling dismissing a request for a transfer seriously impairs the interests of a party may an immediate appeal against such ruling be filed by a prima facie showing of such grounds.