February 2010、My Opinion of this week
My opinion of this week(666)：
Is it fair for prosecutors office to disclose various secret information
concerning the matter under examination?
Prosecutors indicted Democratic Party of Japan lawmaker Tohohiro Ishikawa
on Thursday but opted not to charge DPJ Secretary General Icihro Ozawa due
to insufficient evidence in relation to the alleged false reporting of
Ichiro Ozawa's political funds.
As a matter of fact, however, all people in Japan already knew this on
Wednesday morning. I was surprised to read the headline of Asahi Newspaper
on Wednesday saying that Ichiro Ozawa would not be charged by prosecutors
office on this case. The paper indicated that it was just an assumption as
far as they can know but all readers took it as a definite decision by
prosecutors office concerning the case at this time. The information is
provided surely by prosecutors office although it was not any official
announcement by itself. That is a so called a "leaked" information provided
by prosecutors in charge as informal basis. Is it fair or even legally
proper for prosecutors office to do so?
This is not the first time for prosecutors to make such information leak in
the case of Ozawa money scandal or some other cases. In this case, it is
obvious that prosecutors office have leaked some very critical issues from
time to time which are only known by prosecutors themselves and men in
suspect. No one else could hardly get such information as a matter of fact.
But newspaper have reported that sort of information from time to time
especially so often on Ozawa's money scandal case. The disclose of such
legal information by public servant is prohibited by law, of course. I
wonder how can prosecutors office continue to disclose such critical
information that way?
By using such unfair and even illegal link between prosecutors and mass media,
men in suspects are are surely damaged seriously through such unofficial
reports made by newspapers and TV. Ichiro Ozawa himself was got hurt seriously
by such sort of news although he was not indicted at this time. I imagine
that that must have been an intention that prosecutors office want to attain.
On the morning of Wednesday, when several newspaper reported the news as
stated above, I was watching morning TV news show casted by Monta Mino on
channel 5 in Tokyo. He was talking about the exemption of Ozawa from the
charge. All commentators as well as Monta Mino criticized Ichiro Ozawa about
what he was not indicted in that case. Monta Mino said this way: "Why has
Ichiro Ozawa not been charged while three of his secretaries were indicted? "
Other commentators criticized Ozawa in the same manner one after another.
I felt a great anger on that TV program. It is very strange and abnormal kind
of story as a matter of fact. Why is this? One commentator continued to say
this way: "Ichiro Ozawa was not charged at time , but he still keeps a lot of
doubt by himself. Prosecutors must have had a number of issues in question
which will be questioned in the future." I was really surprised with that
statement.
Is Monta Mino a prosecutor by himself? Or is he even a judge at a court? How
can he or other commentators condemn others in that way? That is not what
they should not do.
I feel a great danger about what is happening around us these days.
2010/2/6
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week(667):
The war on Toyota
The recall for Toyota car became a big issue worldwide, especially in US.
Toyota is fully responsible for the case and asked to take all sort of proper
actions so that they could regain the confidence from users all over the world.
There are nothing so much for Japanese government to help Toyota as far as
improvement of the troubles on mechanical and technical issues. They must
solve those issues by themselves. It seems people in Japan are not showing so
much interest in this issues. But the issue is getting bigger and bigger in
U.S. not only for users of Toyota, but also for automotive industry, labor
unions, states and federal governments, congress and mass media.
What I am concerned with is not such technical recall problems but the fact
that the issue are getting more political issues rather than just industrial
issue in U.S. It seems that Obama government and congress showed very
aggressive reaction against this recall issue. As one of a Japanese, I am
afraid to have a kind of suspicion that all of this move is to utilize the
recall to let U.S. automakers such as GM and Chrysler be better position which
are now under serious management troubles and come back strong in domestic
market.
My personal concerns on such observations have been testified when I found the
article written by Financial Times in Canada on February 10th. Their article
wrote how US government and congress and mass media are taking a kind of
unfair and improper approach against Toyota's recall, denouncing U.S. Secretary
of Transportation Ray Lahood on his quite emotional statement to stop driving
Toyota car until the safe of the car were guaranteed by Toyota. The paper
called public hearing to be made by Congress a political lynch to draw the
attention of mass media and people.
The paper casted doubt further on various reports made by US mass media
concerning Toyota car accidents including death case due to some mechanical
troubles at this time saying if all of those accidents are really caused by
the said recall mechanical defects.
I was surprised very much when I read those article of Canada Financial Times.
Any Japanese papers and TV have not provided any of such facts and observation
as far as I know so far, although there may be some in somewhere.
Yes, it is a war as Financial Times titled in their article. It is the war
on Toyota and industrial war between U.S. and Japan in many ways. Why does
Japanese government show little interest in what is happening in U.S. ? Why
do Japanese mass media not try to write more of such views shown by foreign
media like Canada Financial Times?
Seiji Maehara, Minister of Transportation and Land visited John Victor Roos,
U.S. Ambassador to Japan early this week and expressed his concerns what is
happening in U.S. It is reported that he asked J.Roos for U.S government to
handle the case in proper manner so that good allied relation between Japan and
U.S. would not got hurt in any ways. I have a great disagreement with such
general and weak approach by Minister Maehara. I believe that he should say
something more definite on such unfair statement made by Ray Lahood, Secretary
of Transportation.
My serious frustration on those happening have been healed a little bit when
I read English news article of asahi com. They reported that governors of four
states where Toyota are making production and sales operation in U.S. sent
a joint statement to U.S. Congress demanding congress should handle public
hearing on Toyota recall very properly so that Toyota would not hurt seriously
under unfair treatment. Yes, that's right. Toyota U.S. is now U.S. company
which employ 170,000 people in their operation.
Both U.S. Government and Congress should not forget this when they will take
various actions from now on and the same thing can be said for Japanese side.
It is not to be the war.
2010/2/13
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week(668):
Questioning technique is not the matter
The first debate session by top leaders of three major parties was held on
Wednesday, February 17th at the diet. The debate was not quite exciting
one due to rather weak and inactive debate capacity by Sadakazu Tanigaki,
President of LDP(Liberal Democratic Party) against Yukio Hatoyama, Prime
Minister and Representative of DPJ (Democratic Party of Japan). President
Tanigaki was criticized a lot for it after the debate session.
Answering to many of such criticism, he said at the press conference next day:
"Well, I think my questioning technique, especially technique of cross
examination was not quite good. That's why I could not attack Prime Minister
Hatoyama in more severe manor. I would like to train such technique of
questioning myself much more in the future." I was quite disappointed to hear
what he said this.
Tanigaki was a lawyer originally before he became a lawmaker. The reason why
his debate was not quite exciting and interesting is very obvious. Tanigaki
spent most his time to attack Hatoyama on political money scandal. He wished
he could put Hatoyama in very difficult position as if he acted like a very
capable professional prosecutor at court concerning money scandal. No, that's
not what people of Japan, including myself wanted to see at that debate. The
diet is not a court of any sorts. It's the place to debate a number of
political issues in question at the moment.
Since the start of ordinary diet session in early January, opposition parties
have spent a lot of time attacking two top leaders of DPJ, namely Yukio
Hatoyama,Prime Minister and Ichiro Ozawa, Secretary General of DPJ concerning
their political money scandal. I don't say that is not necessary. It is quite
reasonable for opposition fronts to attack ruling fronts on this important
issue. But it is too much in many ways now. Opposition fronts spend too much
time disregarding a lot more important political issues relating to annual
budget for next physical years staring in April.
The problem concerning LDP's attack on money scandal against Prime Minister
Hatoyama is not only on excessive time they spend at the diet session but
also on some of their unfair and immoral kind of approach to put Prime
Minister Hatoyama in difficult position. One of a typical example as such was
a question provided by Kaoru Yosano, former finance Minister at Aso Cabinet,
at the budget committee at diet prior to the debate session by Tanigaki and
Hatoyama.
Kaoru Yosano criticized Yukio Hatoyama referring he is a king of tax dodge for
he had not paid a gift tax for a lot of money he had been provided by his
mother. That's is the known fact already in any way and I personally agreed
with what Yosono criticized Hatoyama in that way. But I don't like the way
that Yosano approached to attain his purpose.
In order to justify his word, Kaoru Yosano referred the testimony said by
Kunio Hatoyama, young brother of Yukio Hatoyama and former Minister of
Internal Affairs of Aso Cabinet. Yosano disclosed the conversation between
Yukio Hatoyama and his mother concerning the fact of give and take concerning
money gift. Such conversation was heard by Kunio Hatoyama according to
Yosano. Kunio Hatoyama denied that fact lator on when he was asked if that
hearing was true at press conference.
I was quite disappointed with this level of question and answer session at
budget committee of the diet where many more important policy issues should
be discussed to settle annual budget which start in April. How can those
lawmakers continue to argue such silly matters under this very difficult
economic and political situation in this countries. There exists a lot more
very important economic, diplomatic and other political issues to be discussed
at the diet.
I don't intend to support political stance of Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama
at all. It is natural for them to face such low popular support rate at the
moment. But at the same time, leaders of opposition LDP party should know
the reason why supporting rate for their party has not been improved at all
since they lost power at last August regardless a number of misconducts by
ruling fronts since then.
What they argue at the diet is not money scandal any more. The diet is the
place to debate a number of key political issues which relate closely the
life of people in this country.
2010/2/20
Tadashi HAYASE
My opinion of this week(669):
Reduction of diet seats
At a lecture meeting of a local party gathering, Kozo Watanabe, a
lawmaker of DPJ (Democratic Party of Japan) , the former vice
chairman of the House of Representative, proposed to reduce number
of diet seats in somewhat drastic way. According to his proposal,
total number of seats at the House of Representative will be reduced
to 300 from 480. The total number of seats at the House of Councils
will be reduced to 100 from 242. The proposal is quite drastic one
and but that seems to be just a kind of personal lip service in
nature. Not many lawmakers and people in political world believe the
feasibility of such proposal in foreseeable future.
Such reduction plan could hardly be attained under the present
political environment. Any political parties including ruling DPJ
would accept even 50% or even 30% of such reduction number from
any points of views for the matter is the lifeline itself for any
lawmakers concerned at the diet. Any of such drastic reduction could
hardly be attained unless a certain strong dictatorship monocracy
appear in political world. That would never happen under this democratic
political system as today.
At the last general election in August last year, both ruling DPJ and
LDP (Liberal Democratic Party ) ruling party at that time presented
some number of seats reduction plan at two houses in their manifestoes
respectively, although reduction was quite limited in number. That is
not like such drastic one as shown by Watanabe. Both DPJ and LDP were
obliged to show some seat reduction plan so that they could answer to
some general feeling of people who believe number of lawmakers in diet
are too many in general in this country compared with other advanced
democratic countries in the world.
Regardless the existence of such manifestoes. any political parties,
large or small, including those two major parties have not shown yet
any concrete plan as that of Watanabe in the past six months since the
change of power happened in last August.
None of parties will never work hard on this issue, of course. They are
in a hidden agreement so that they could avoid the chance to start
discussing the reform of diet as much as possible. It is obvious that
all political parties will argue the issue from all possible points of
views and agreement will never be attained in some ordinal manner.
But I believe that there should exist some basic argument on why such
reduction of seats is necessary and possible under the present social
and political environment today. The reduction of seats at diet is
necessary not only for reduction of expenses involved with diet activities
but for more efficient operation of diet, democratic system itself. Kozo
Watanabe argued this seat reduction issue only from the view of cost reduction
but it is the issue of efficiency of operation of diet activities to attain
democracy in this country.
The key is the fact that democracy may possibly be attained today by more
direct participation of people in politics without having so many
lawmakers due to advancement of networking system in our society. Some
kind of direct poll system is even very possible by using various IT
technologies and internet or telecommunication network. Why do we
have to continue to rely hundred percent on lawmakers to express our views
and opinions on various political matters? It is now the time to discuss
some possibility to introduce direct democratic system in our society.
I don't think that the time will come soon to introduce any of such direct
democratic system in our society. But I believe any of such direct democratic
system idea should be discussed together with the argument on diet reform
plan including reduction of seats which will be under way from now on.
The issue is not just the reduction of number of seats at diet. The issue
is how we can improve our democracy in our society by some more direct
participation of citizens in some ways..
2010/2/27
Tadashi HAYASE
Home Page