An in-depth analysis of Japan’s failure to ratify the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime, exposing how major media outlets misrepresent the “Preparation of Terrorism” law and obstruct international security cooperation.

Japan is not resisting global security standards. Its media are.
2017-04-09
Among UN member states, 96 percent—187 countries—have concluded the Convention, leaving only eleven countries, including Japan, that have not.
I have long pointed out that the reason Japanese citizens, who subscribe to newspapers led by the Asahi Shimbun and watch television news programs, hear nothing but opposition without being told the true reality is that these media outlets have, until three years ago in August and even now, continued conduct that fully amounts to conspiracy.
That my reasoning was entirely correct has now been clearly demonstrated by Yoshiko Sakurai in this week’s issue of Shukan Shincho, through the following substantial work.
(Emphasis in the text and the sections marked with asterisks are mine.)
“The Crime of Preparation for Terrorism Is an International Norm—Its Enactment Must Be Accelerated.”
The Asahi Shimbun and the Tokyo Shimbun continue to mount all-out opposition to the so-called “Preparation of Terrorism” law.
The amendment to the Act on Punishment of Organized Crimes, which establishes the new offense, is domestic legislation required for Japan to ratify the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.
Considering the severity of the international security environment surrounding Japan, it should be obvious why ratification is urgently necessary.
Given the threat posed by North Korea and the instability of South Korea amid its leftward shift, the risk of terrorism and transnational crime targeting Japan—especially ahead of the 2020 Tokyo Olympics—continues to rise.
The most essential element in preventing terrorism and crime is information.
Information can only be smoothly exchanged through cooperation with the international community.
That framework is precisely the UN Convention against Transnational Organized Crime.
Ninety-six percent of UN member states—187 countries—have already ratified it, leaving only eleven, including Japan, that have not.
The government approved the bill in a cabinet decision on March 21 and aims to enact it by June, but parliamentary debate has stalled due to issues such as the Moritomo Gakuen scandal.
Media outlets led by the Asahi Shimbun continue to distort the purpose of the bill.
On March 22, the Asahi ran a front-page headline declaring an “all-out confrontation over the ‘conspiracy crime.’”
It even announced that although it would “use the government’s name when necessary,” it would continue calling the bill a “conspiracy crime” because it allegedly punishes criminal planning at the conceptual stage.
If the bill truly infringed upon freedom of thought, I myself could never accept it.
However, anyone who properly reads the bill will find such concerns unfounded.
To claim that the current government proposal is unchanged from previous versions is a clear error.
My position can be summarized in two points.
First, a conspiracy law is necessary.
Second, it must include clear, visible safeguards and objective requirements so that it does not intrude into individual thoughts or restrict freedom of expression or belief.
For that purpose, the ruling parties should accept the amendments once proposed by the Democratic Party.
Eleven years ago, the Democratic Party put forward commendable amendments, and the Asahi Shimbun argued along similar lines at the time.
When I reviewed my statements from that period by examining the Diet records, I found that I had strongly emphasized concerns about arbitrary arrests and investigations threatening freedom of thought.
That stance remains completely unchanged today.
Interestingly, at that time, the Asahi Shimbun, the Democratic Party, and I all shared the same demand to impose restraints on investigative and arrest powers.
However, the decisive difference between us lay in whether such a law was necessary for Japan.
I believed it was necessary then, and I believe so now.
In fact, in the records from eleven years ago, I reiterated the necessity of a conspiracy law six times.
The current bill differs significantly from the earlier version.
Previously, mere agreement to commit a serious crime could constitute an offense.
Now, in addition to agreement, an act of preparation for execution is required.
The explicit safeguards that I demanded—and that even the Asahi once sought—have now been implemented.
The Democratic Party’s demands have also been incorporated.
Under the current proposal, punishment cannot be imposed based solely on internal thoughts.
The Asahi’s claim that the bill remains unchanged is therefore plainly incorrect.
The number of crimes subject to punishment has been reduced from 615 to 277.
On March 31, Senator Masahisa Sato explained on the internet program “Genron TV” that only crimes punishable by death or imprisonment of four years or more are covered, and that after excluding offenses unrelated to organized crime, such as election law violations, the list was narrowed to 277.
It is now far clearer than before that labor unions and similar organizations are not targets of investigation.
(To be continued.)