This essay examines the Constitutional Democratic Party’s parliamentary boycott strategy, its logic during the “Moritomo-Kake” controversy, and the alleged connections in the Ministry of Education bribery case. It analyzes the principle of burden of proof in a rule-of-law state and highlights the contradictions and double standards in opposition party tactics.

2019-02-24
It was Kiyomi Tsujimoto who led the thorough boycott strategy in the Diet, and members of the Constitutional Democratic Party and other specified opposition parties effectively took a twenty-day holiday around Golden Week without the consent of the people.

The previous article, published on 2019-02-16, discussed the possible connection between the Ministry of Education bribery case and Representative Tsunehiko Yoshida of the Constitutional Democratic Party, and it has now ranked 12th in Ameba’s official hashtag ranking under “Faculty of Veterinary Medicine.”
The following is a continuation.

Political funding reports are available only for three years.
So what is the reality?
Unfortunately, under the current system, only three years of political funding reports are published on the Ministry of Internal Affairs website.
Therefore, the report cited in the Weekly Asahi article cannot be directly verified.

Even after reviewing the three years of reports available for Ms. Tsujimoto’s political fund organization “Citizens and Peace Project,” no mention of “Kansai Namacon” can be confirmed.

As an individual running a website, it is frustrating that there are limits to the information one can obtain.

Copies of political funding reports from 1999 and 2000 for the organization “Politica = Kiyomi and Citizens” are circulating online, but I have not obtained evidence proving their authenticity.

Therefore, at this point, I will refrain from conclusively stating that Ms. Tsujimoto is connected to the ready-mix concrete organization.
Even if the subject is a member of the Diet, this website will not declare someone “guilty” without firm evidence.

However, if the person under suspicion is Ms. Tsujimoto, the matter changes.
Because she led the strategy during the Moritomo-Kake and sexual harassment controversies that required the accused side to prove their innocence.

Japan is a rule-of-law state.
To declare someone “guilty,” it is not the accused who bears the burden of proving innocence.
It is the accuser who bears the burden of proving guilt.

The double standard of the Constitutional Democratic Party is astonishing.

To be continued.