Journalists Protest Conspiracy Law

The people who don’t want articles to be written, who don’t want people to know about the bad things they have done… if they have this law, they can easily have us arrested as criminals at any time.”

The object of freelance journalist Katsuhisa Miyake’s concern is a conspiracy bill now being debated in the Japanese Diet. He believes that the law, which would make conspiracy to commit any of 619 different crimes an offence, could used to obstruct the work of investigative journalists in Japan.

Miyake has reason to be wary. In 2003 he was sued by Takefuji over articles he wrote on the consumer loan company for weekly magazines. He lost and was ordered to pay 110 million yen [935,000 dollars]. It was several years before Miyake could overturn the ruling on appeal. “It was preposterous. I couldn’t pay it. I would have gone bankrupt.”

He fears that the law could make it easier for large companies and politicians to intimidate investigative journalists through the threat of arrest. “Even the Diet representatives themselves who are debating the conspiracy bill don’t know what it is for,” he says, arguing that its main aim is simply to increase police power. “If the police or prosecutors decide to arrest someone, this law will make it extremely easy for them to do so.”

The bill was first introduced to the Japanese Diet in 2003 to ratify Japan’s signing of the United Nations Convention against Transnational Organized Crime. “It is Japan’s duty to ratify the treaty,” stresses Judicial Affairs Committee member and vocal supporter of the bill, Katsuei Hirasawa. He says that the law would be a powerful tool to fight against organized crime in Japan and abroad. Having spent over 25 years working in Japan’s Police Agency, he also believes that a conspiracy law is needed to strengthen police powers and protect the rights of victims. “[Opponents to the law] are saying you should crack down on crime after it has happened. It is too late then.”

Despite the backing of a large Diet majority from Prime Minister Koizumi‘s landslide victory in last September’s election, the bill has been twice rejected and revised. Now it has been postponed until the next Diet session. The delay and revisions were prompted by strenuous objections by lawyers, the Japanese press and opposition parties.

Lawyer and opponent of the bill Yuichi Kaido says that the concept of conspiracy is largely absent from Japanese law, restricted to only the most serious crimes. Unlike in the United States or the United Kingdom, where conspiracy laws have a long history, he says, Japanese law is closer to French or German law. Police can typically only make arrests after a crime has actually happened. “Japanese people can’t understand the concept of issuing punishment even though no crime has yet been committed,” he says.

The original draft of the bill made members of any “group” subject to arrest for conspiracy. Critics expressed concern that the law could be used against NGOs or unions. Although the bill has since been revised to apply specifically to groups with a criminal purpose, Kaido argues that the definition is still too vague. “It is the police who will decide whether or not a group is a criminal group,” he says. He is also concerned that once a member of an otherwise innocent organization was arrested, the group would be de facto classified as criminal.

Kaido notes that government officials have said little about how evidence of conspiracy will be collected. Wire-tapping, heavy-handed interrogation and tip-offs are likely tools for the police, he argues. Even conspiracy members who later change their minds will still be subject to arrest; only conspiracy members who go the police will be treated leniently.

The threat of arrest is a powerful tool for intimidation because once arrested, suspects have few rights, says Kaido. “For 23 days they can interrogate a suspect day and night. In a very serious case the interrogation can continue for 10 or 12 hours every day,” he says. Bail is rarely granted. “Almost everyone confesses to the Japanese police.” Until recently, interrogations were unrecorded, and even now prosecutors can decide when or when not to record. There are also persistent allegations of torture, says Kaido. “If you look at the totality of criminal cases, torture is very rare—but it is also rare for people to deny the charges. Among those cases, torture is not uncommon.”

Former National Police Agency official Hirasawa emphatically rejects the Japan Federation of Bar Associations’ arguments. “[Their] opposition to the bill is absolutely groundless and mistaken. They haven’t studied the bill,” he says. “They are just doing their best to protect the human rights of offenders. They have no interest in the rights of victims.”

To the charge that the law could be used to intimidate NGOs, unions or journalists, he says only groups whose purpose was crime would be targeted. “Why would the law to apply to journalists? It would be inconceivable for journalists to be targeted by the law; they are not a criminal group. If their purpose was reporting, the law wouldn’t apply.”

He also argues that Japanese police have far less power than their foreign equivalents and have to be sure of a conviction before making arrests. “In Japan, 99.97 percent of people are found guilty in court after they are arrested,” he points out. “Take a look at America, Britain, Europe – it is 60 or 70 percent at most. You can easily see that foreign police are making more wrongful arrests.”

Opposition party, the Social Democratic Party of Japan is against the conspiracy bill. “There is no need to destroy Japan’s system of criminal law and create a conspiracy law,” says leader and former lawyer Mizuho Fukushima. She compares the anti-conspiracy bill to the science fiction film “Minority Report” in which Tom Cruise’s character is arrested for a crime he has yet to commit. “It won’t really be to fight against organized crime groups,” she says. “There is a high probability that it will be used against NGOs, unions, and infringe on various kinds of freedom of expression.”

She fears the law could be used to stifle opposition to right-wing projects, including reform of the peace constitution, a new education law to promote patriotism and expansion of the U.S. military bases in Japan. “The right to freedom of expression to protest against the [Iraq] war is being severely curtailed,” Fukushima says, pointing to the arrest of the “Tachikawa three,” peace activists who were arrested for distributing anti-war leaflets to the mail boxes of a Self Defense Forces housing unit. “This law could be a tool to further suppress anti-war freedom of speech,” she says.

Earlier in June, several hundred people gathered in Hibiya Park in Tokyo to demonstrate against the bill. The meeting, where Diet member Fukushima also spoke, was held a stone’s throw from the Ministry of Justice and the National Police Agency. The gathering included trade union representatives, peace activists and consumer groups.

Freelance journalist Hitomi Nishimura was at the meeting to represent “Opinion Makers Against the Conspiracy Law,” a group of journalists, writers, broadcasters and bloggers. The group has produced a DVD, a series of downloadable movies and an anti-conspiracy law blog that gets 1,500 hits a day.

“Journalists who report on those in power won’t be able to do their jobs,” says Nishimura. She suggests that without the support of large media organizations, the threat of arrest would be enough deter freelance journalists from investigating the powerful. If they are arrested, the loss of weeks of pay, whether or not charges are brought, could be disastrous. And the same applies to small magazine publishers. Last July the publisher of a scandal magazine, “Kami no Bakudan,” was arrested and charged with defamation. The magazine had published a series of articles on Aruze Corporation, a pachinko gambling machine maker. The publisher was released more than 6 months later. The magazine alleges ties between the company and the local police.

Another member of the group, freelancer Yu Terasawa says that he has particular reason to be worried about the law. “I write about illegal police activities,” he says. “If I tried to get incriminating internal documents through an intermediary, I could be arrested for conspiracy to theft.” Unlike even a defamation prosecution, the police could take action before an article was researched, never mind published. He points out that there is no independent police watch-dog in Japan, and he fears that the law would make it even easier for the police to impede investigation by freelance reporters.

Economics journalist Ryuji Shinohara notes a vast difference in the position of freelance journalists and those working for large media organizations. “Politicians are more afraid of freelancers who earn 3 million yen a year than big media journalists who earn 30 million,” he says. Japan’s press club system means that mainstream media journalists can’t rock the boat because they risk the very real threat of being denied access to sources. He argues that it is up to Japan’s freelancers to provide independent reporting – something that would be made even more difficult by the conspiracy law. “The main newspapers have their own influence with the police. It’s the small publishers and freelancers who will have problems.”

Ironically, even when “Opinion Makers Against the Conspiracy Law” attempted to attend Diet deliberations on the conspiracy bill they bumped up against all too familiar obstructions. On arriving at the Diet Judicial Affairs Committee, they were unable to get press seats, as those were reserved for the press club members.

Despite the bill’s postponement, given the strength of the ruling coalition majority, commentators expect it to pass sooner or later. If that happens, freelance journalists as well as NGOs and activists will have a nervous wait to see how the new law is applied. Many argue that they have little reason to trust the authorities. A recent editorial in the Asahi Shimbun echoed their concerns: “We cannot deny that distrust of police and the court system underlies the public’s anxieties regarding the conspiracy bill.

About Tony McNicol

Comments

  1. I don’t think that there should be a law-any law at all-that should stop journalists of any kind
    from uncoverig any kind of truth whatsoever. The
    news (from newspapers to even television), is
    and always be made for one thing: to show
    people the truth-by giving them what they want.
    If having to be accused for something that
    is so irrelevant as commencing any kind of investigation, then what is the point of
    this law being made in the first place? I think that therefore the diet abolish the “Journalists protest Conspiracy law” all together, and just let the journalists continue what they do best:investigating and uncovering the truth. thank you.