What Real Political Intervention in an Investigation Means: The Senkaku Chinese Captain Release Case and the Prosecutors Office Act Controversy

In May 2020, opposition parties, the media, and celebrities launched a campaign against the revision of the Prosecutors Office Act. This article introduces a Sankei-sho editorial and argues that the real example of political intervention in an investigation was the 2010 release of the Chinese captain involved in the Senkaku collision incident under the Kan Naoto administration.

2020-05-17
However, there has been political intervention in an investigation in the past.
That was the case in 2010, when the Kan Naoto cabinet of the Democratic Party of Japan, currying favor with China, forcibly had released the Chinese captain who had repeatedly rammed Japan Coast Guard patrol vessels off the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa.
Yesterday’s Sankei-sho was truly a splendid editorial.
At the same time, it also proved that my assessment of Prime Minister Abe was entirely correct: that he is, in the good sense, a young master from a good family; that he was not only cherished by his grandfather Nobusuke Kishi, but also inherited the qualities of his grandfather, who was one of the finest figures in Japan at that time; that he is the greatest realist among all postwar prime ministers; and that his character, too, is the finest among them.
In other words, Prime Minister Abe is a “young master from a good family” in the true sense, while those who are now making a great fuss over prosecutors and the like not only have dubious origins, but also prove that it is doubtful whether they are genuine Japanese; the fact that Tetsuro Fukuyama is a Korean resident in Japan is only something the mass media do not say, while on the internet it has been perfectly proven, and above all his facial expressions and words and deeds demonstrate it one hundred percent; they prove that such people are dubious Korean residents in Japan or Japanese impersonators.
_______________________________
The debate over the bill to revise the Prosecutors Office Act, which would extend the retirement age of prosecutors, is noisy.
They say, “It undermines the neutrality of prosecutors and the separation of powers,” said Yukio Edano, leader of the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan.
“It seriously harms the neutrality and independence of prosecutors,” said Yuichiro Tamaki, leader of the Democratic Party for the People.
Their argument is that it could allow investigative intervention by the administration of the time.
However, the prosecution is an administrative body, and the authority to appoint the Prosecutor-General and superintending prosecutors originally belongs to the Cabinet.
The Ministry of Justice’s view in response to criticism of the revision bill also rejects the claim that it violates the separation of powers.
The purpose of the revision bill, following the recommendation of the National Personnel Authority, was to align the retirement age of prosecutors, who are national public servants, with that of other public servants.
The reason it was pursued by the opposition parties and celebrities raised voices of opposition was that people speculated about its relationship with the extension of the retirement age of Hiromu Kurokawa, superintending prosecutor of the Tokyo High Public Prosecutors Office, which the government decided at a Cabinet meeting in January this year.
The mass media, including this newspaper, wrote of Mr. Kurokawa that he was “said to be close to the Prime Minister’s Office,” and an incident also occurred in which an envelope containing a cutter blade was delivered to Mr. Kurokawa.
However, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe himself has told those around him:
“On what grounds do they say he is close? I hardly know Mr. Kurokawa.”
On the other hand, he says he met many times with the other candidate for Prosecutor-General, alongside Mr. Kurokawa, in order to receive explanations about the revised Organized Crime Punishment Act, which newly established the crime of “preparations for terrorism and other organized crimes.”
If so, is this not a kind of conspiracy theory that says, “The Abe administration must be plotting something bad”?
People say that where there is smoke, there is fire, but if someone sets a fire and fans it with a hand fan, that is another matter, and it may become a great conflagration.
However, there has been political intervention in an investigation in the past.
That was the case in 2010, when the Kan Naoto cabinet of the Democratic Party of Japan, currying favor with China, forcibly had released the Chinese captain who had repeatedly rammed Japan Coast Guard patrol vessels off the Senkaku Islands in Okinawa.

コメントを残す

メールアドレスが公開されることはありません。 が付いている欄は必須項目です


上の計算式の答えを入力してください