Legal action seeking damages against critics raises concerns about freedom of expression in a democratic society.
This text examines the aftermath of the Yoshida testimony reporting controversy and the broader implications of lawsuits that may function as pressure against critical commentary.

However, this time the Asahi has finally trampled upon freedom of speech and expression, which can be called the very foundation of a democratic nation.
2018-01-29.
The following is a continuation of the previous chapter.
Three months after the first protest, on September 11, 2014, Asahi Shimbun president Kimura Tadakazu admitted that the Yoshida testimony articles had been erroneous, fully retracted them, announced the dismissal of senior editorial executives, and issued an apology.
An Asahi executive officer also came to me personally to apologize.
It appeared at first that the Asahi might revise its policy of responding to commentary it disliked with “threats,” yet I continued to watch its actions carefully to see whether that was truly the case.
However, this time the Asahi has finally trampled upon freedom of speech and expression, which form the very foundation of a democratic nation.
Such lawsuits are scorned in Europe and the United States, where freedom of speech and expression is valued, as “SLAPP lawsuits.”
They are what are called lawsuits intended to intimidate critical speech.
They refer to cases in which organizations such as well-funded major corporations file suits against individuals for retaliatory purposes such as intimidation or coercion.
Although this time not only Mr. Ogawa personally but also the publisher Asuka Shinsha has been sued, it can be said to be close to a SLAPP lawsuit.
To be continued.