False accusation nation

 Hostage justice is a partial phenomenon

In Japan's history, although human rights ideas have been formally given from the top, citizens have never claimed human rights on their own.
Because, literally, he has never received human rights education.
In fact, little changed because the monarchy constitution, the Meiji Constitution, formally replaced the Japanese sovereign constitution.
In particular, judicial power is not surprising, since its bureaucracy, or official, has not changed at all.

This is a major cause of the history of false accusations in Japan, which has continued from the postwar period to the present.
The people have been believed in myths, which are completely unfounded, to say that if the constitution is easily replaced, the rights and consciousness of the people and the legal spirit of civil servants will change together.
The media and press reporters have bought both roles.
Prior to the war, he played an explicit role as a government purveyor, but the essence remained unchanged after the war.
It is only natural that neither government organizations nor the press have been replaced by humans.
However, Japan has made a leap forward in post-war reconstruction, especially in the field of economic science, heading for developed countries.
It is also true that this rise to mass consumption civilization has given the people the illusion that their spiritual lives are improving and leveling up in parallel.

The inconvenient truth has always been concealed by the government, and has always been buried in the dark in the form of passive media and scholarly intellectual cooperation.
It was not born yesterday, such as hostage justice.
It has existed in Japan since ancient times.
It is openly present in this democratic era of Reiwa.
It has been 100 years since the constitution was transformed into a democratic constitution, and the feudal politics of criminal justice ignoring human rights is still alive.
It is clear how the public has been informed and how the media and academia are not performing their original functions.

In the history of false accusations, there have been no examples of failure at the stage of hostage justice.
The Ghosn case is the first failure of hostage justice.
As a result, the structure of the false accusations in Japan was exposed to the daylight, even to the bones.
Even in this period, the Japanese media did not recognize that the essence of the Ghosn case was a false accusation, an example of a failure during the hostage justice stage of the process.

Most foreign reporters can anticipate future developments.
Only Japanese reporters cannot predict where the trial will be.
The proof is that the prosecution leak information, which was dripping like a storm, has dried up like a river with dead water sources.
Such an idiot. The incident is about to begin with the Ghosn counterattack.

Japanese newspaper reporters do not have the intellectual ability to judge the content and direction of a trial.
Despite being a criminal reporter, he doesn't do the basics of criminal trials at all.
There is a situation in which this has been arrested by a prosecutor and drooling leak information of all-you-can-eat, and reporting it as it is.

Why is the prosecution silenced now without shedding Ghosn's disadvantageous information?
I hope Japanese journalists at least have such questions.
Why doesn't the trial proceed?
Did any expert explain?
Yame-ken(procecutor-ritired lawyer) and TV lawyers irresponsibly, they are spilling fakenews information such as "Gone's trial will not be held in the future."
The appearance of the Japanese media, together with the prosecutors, deciding on a "malicious silence" is probably a strange sight to the world press.

Anti-literacy interpretation

 

Example 1 of anti-literacy interpretation

Examples of prescription law

The Criminal Procedure Code has only two articles that define the suspension of prosecution. For nearly 60 years, this article has been unlawfully interpreted. This situation alone is a testament to how academic and logical consideration has not been given to criminal justice in Japan.

In terms of the structure of the articles and legislative techniques, Article 254 of the Act is a principle rule, and Article 255 of the next article is a supplementary rule. However, 60 years ago, prosecutors and judges saw Article 255 as a parallel and parallel with Article 254 as an independent statute of limitations. However, this is an afterthought, and neither the prosecutor nor the judge at the time simply wanted to assert that the prosecution filed in connection with smuggling was valid.

The prescription law provides for the effects of facts that are both civil and criminal and objective and can be unambiguously proved by evidence. Since the prosecution statute is the lapse of the prosecution's right to prosecute, the failure to prosecute the prosecutor's right to prosecute is the rationale for the progress of the lapse. Accordingly, the statute of limitations can only be stopped by the prosecutor's objective lawful actions, which may be the exercise of the right of prosecution. The principle is "prosecution" set forth in Article 244 of the Act. However, even if a prosecution is filed, the prosecution may be dismissed. In that case, the suspension of the prosecution shall not be suspended. This is described in Article 254 of the Act. However, there is another extremely significant exception.That is when a copy of the indictment cannot reach the accused. In this case, since the prosecution itself is not effectively established, the prosecution is dismissed. However, the cause of the dismissal in this case is obviously different from the dismissal scheduled in Article 244 of the Act. Prosecutors have no fault. Therefore, an exceptional case in which a public prosecutor has no fault and results in rejection of a prosecution is additionally provided in Article 255 of the Act.

The latter part of Article 255 of the Act is exactly the case of a public action dismissal. Of course, the first sentence of the Supreme Court precedes the refusal of prosecution, but only the "position of the criminal", which has nothing to do with the actions of the prosecutor. In any sense, this does not mean "objective use of prosecutor's right to prosecute". In other words, there is no statutory suspension effect, either logically or legally.

The case of the Supreme Court was a violation of the Constitution as irrational discrimination, because it did not recognize statutory benefits from the beginning for Japanese or foreign residents residing overseas. Since then, there have been criticisms of the doctrine and lower judgments. The reality of this is none other than the Ghosn incident.

Example 2 of anti-literacy interpretation

Examples of the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act

Ghosn's primary suspicion was the misrepresentation of a security report. It started with a security report eight years back from the time of the arrest. The statute of limitations is three years, in sharp contrast to the SEC's late complaints only over the last three years. However, the prosecution was cautious, prosecuting the prosecution in five years and the latest three years, and the media who did nothing was just wondering about this prosecution. It seemed that the Japanese media really wrote an article using only leak information.

Not only is the name of the offense redundant, but it seems that many reporters have never seen the financial report itself. This is because Nissan's published Securities Report clearly states that there are three important decision-makers at the time: Ghosn, Kelly and Saikawa. Therefore, only Ghosn and Kelly must first be aware of the contradictions in which arrests and prosecutions are made regarding the statement of officer compensation.

The suspicion that Ghosn was arrested was that he made a false statement in the executive remuneration. Moreover, it was of such a degree that it was judged "important."

In spite of the leak information, the content of the false statement published was astonishing to the public. Ghosn received a director's remuneration that was nearly double the announced director's remuneration for each business period and did not mention it.

The vast majority of people in the world noticed what name they were being paid for fraudulent executive compensation. Everyone was surprised again by the information that was flowing. No money was actually received, but an agreement that signed a non-competition contract or consultation contract when retiring in the future and the amount of the contract money at that time were expressed in concrete figures every term determined to be the sum ofit. The agreement was kept secret in a safe. The prosecution "interpreted" that specific figures had been determined each term and that they were nothing but future executive compensation.

Even beginners in corporate accounting know that executive remuneration is legally approved by the Board of Directors every year. The prosecutor's definition of "future executive compensation" does not exist at least in current corporate accounting principles. This is an interpretation of the prosecution's self-righteousness.

Example 3 of anti-literacy interpretation

Company Law Example 1

There are two cases of special breach of criminal offense. One of the first is the transfer of a derivative financial instrument under the name of Ghosn. The case was also known by the SEC, and the cautionary advice of the SEC restored the contract within the same business period. As a result, there was no loss or profit for the company at the end of the business period.

According to Ghosn's explanation, in the event of a loss during liquidation as a condition of the transfer, Ghosn has obtained the approval of the Board of Directors on the condition that he will guarantee the director's remuneration as collateral and bear the full amount. In fact, there were minutes to that effect. In the end, Ghosn solved this problem with his acquaintance as guarantor. In other words, Ghosn just got Nissan to be the guarantor, and to date, Ghosn has not lost any money in the derivative financial transaction. Ghosn and Nissan concluded the above contract and were arrested and charged with special breach. Ghosn has no intention of causing loss to Nissan, has canceled the contract before liquidation, and will not be guilty of breach.

Example 2 of company law

The second alleged offense is a complete prosecution delusion.The sales incentives properly granted by Nissan to the sales agent actually have a distribution agreement between Ghosn and the sales agent owner, and the sales agent ultimately represents Ghosn's wife according to the secret agreement. The prosecution claims that the company has been credited. Certainly, there is a close relationship between Ghosn and the distributor owner, and it appears that the distributor owner eventually funded Ghosn's wife's company. The problem is the purpose and motivation of the funding. Even if the owner invests, invests, or grants Ghosn's wife's company in hopes of continuing

hospitality, regardless of its name, it is a matter of longevity. Unless Ghosn instructs the amount of the sales incentives, especially the special treatment that is different from other sales agents, it is a relationship of eccentricity and respiration. It cannot be a crime. In the first place, sales incentives are granted, and no crime can be admitted unless the amount is extraordinary. Prosecutors, of course, cannot objectively and clearly distinguish the boundary between reasonable and illegal amounts.

Countries whose interpretation of the law is dominated by marauders are not law-controlled.

Why do Japanese people not see the articles of law written in Japanese? Why don't you see with your own eyes and confirm with your own head? Japan's legal backwardness is just this one word. People are convinced that the law is difficult, and most of them do not understand it. Thus, the Japanese legal community has a grand authoritarianism. In this authoritarian world, it is lawyers who monopolize the role of telling God, like a priest or shrine maiden, and the judge is God. Japanese gods often make mistakes. The victim is nothing but a false victim.

News organizations and academic research institutions are accomplices of false charges

The public's insensitivity to false charges is a result of education and reporting. The majority of the people are unaware or ignorant of the fact that an enormous amount of false accusations have been produced and are still being produced. There is no expert who speaks out of the apparent false accusation of the Ghosn case as a false accusation, except attorney Nobuo Gohara. I wonder if this is a country with tens of thousands of lawyers, a country with free speech and personal rights guaranteed.

Plea bargain

 

Lawyer ethics violation

Japan's plea bargain is concluded by an accomplice, an attorney, and a public prosecutor. Cooperating accomplices cooperate with investigators by witnessing and submitting evidence about other accomplices, and prosecutors respond to this cooperation with various reducing criminal liability. (In this regard, there is a problem that unduly restricts the judge's discretionary power.) The attorney will sign the consent form as the co-accomplice's custody. The contents of the plea bargain will be confirmed in writing and agreed upon by the three parties.

The immediate problem here is that the appointed lawyer recognizes the accomplices' accompliceship from the outset. At this point, the co-accomplice is only a self-described accomplice. A self-proclaimed accomplice may be innocent or the main offender. It is clearly against lawyer's ethics to sign the agreement without the pursuit of the truth, at the mercy of the self-proclaimed accomplice. Because it violates the duty of truth. Moreover, innocence is against the interests of the client and therefore against the intent of the mandate. Relationships with other accomplices have not been ascertained if co-afflicted accomplices claim to be accomplices for escaping their liability for other crimes, or if they are transferring responsibility to lightly accomplices. Then the appointed lawyer becomes an offender. Because of the structural nature of this matter, Japanese plea bargain is an offense in its existence.

The problem of self-described accomplices

The accomplice's confession has always been a problem in its credibility. The credibility of the statement evidence is just It is difficult to confirm the authenticity, and there is a high possibility that false testimony will be given because of the transfer of responsibility. Therefore, having a consent lawyer does not guarantee any credibility. In the past, some accomplices confessed that they were not accomplices, but they made confession by using a secret contract to reduce other crimes.

Illegal collection evidence

In this case, there are two self-identified accomplices; in the form of the alleged offense, all accounting evidence is property of the company, and providing it to third parties without the company's permission is a crime of theft. Verbally stating the contents of the accounting material does mean that it is a crime. After all, the cooperating accomplice was a thief and cooperated with the investigation, which was an illegal investigation. This is obvious to prosecutors, of course, as a lawyer at law. Evidence becomes illegally collected evidence and its ability to prove evidence is denied. This is the reason the prosecution continued to resist the lawyers' request to disclose evidence of plea bargaining.

Traditional underground plea bargain

This case is a rare case where both the plea bargain in the table and the plea bargain of underground exist at the same time. Because underground plea bargain is a illegal contract between the prosecutor and the person who should be the suspect, it cannot directly prove the existence. However, the absurdity that the person who should have been the suspect should not be the suspect, and the arrested Ghosn and Kelly as witnesses to the hostile witness, are presumed to exist. In this case, Hiroto Saikawa, the former CEO.

Major shareholder Renault hesitation 

The fate of the plea bargain is buried in the dark

The failure of hostage justice has prevented prosecutors from proving Ghosn's guilt with valid evidence. Moreover, Ghosn's escape. It is clear that prosecutors and courts will do their best to stop the judgment. The failure of hostage justice indicates the criminal offense of the plea bargaining. Ghosn's trial is not held to conceal this.Years or decades later, the replaced judge will dismiss the prosecution with an innocent face, because it cannot be left open forever. When people forgot. But Ghosn will not miss this prosecution and court misconduct silently. All legal measures and trials as counterattacks break out at home and abroad. Ghosn has already appealed to the world the irrationalities of international arrangements. If the ICPO cancels international arrangements, it is inevitable that Japan will lose its profile.

Where is the ICPO regulation concerned? 

Conspiracy

 

Conspiracy seen by French ambassador

Immediately after his arrest, the French ambassador was asked by Ghosn to rush to Nissan headquarters and conveyed his request to appoint a lawyer. The sight of the ambassador there was the rest of the directors who rejected the request calmly.In all, the arrest was a planned action. These facts were first revealed when Ghosn escaped abroad and became free to speak. The Japanese media show no interest in this surprising press. This is a problem before sensory paralysis. No, since the prosecution leak information has been reported guilty, if the truth that shows innocence comes out, it is the fact that there is no other way but to ignore and silence.

In Kerry's case, the plot was more naked. He had no plans to come to Japan, and was initially reported to have been apprehended by conspiracy and immediately arrested. This is unmistakably presumed guilty coverage.

Conspiracy seen from arrest warrant issuance procedure

The arrest warrant is issued by showing the warrant judge a charge of the crime and showing proof of the crime. Ghosn's suspicion was allegedly a false statement in a security report. In other words, the evidence mainly includes accounting materials owned by the company.Company-owned accounting data is voluntarily provided to third parties and prosecutors only with the consent of the Board of Directors or the representative. This is clearly a theft and a conspiracy, since Nissan's representatives, Ghosn and Kelly, voluntarily provided evidence without their knowledge. Who voluntarily submitted to the prosecution.

If you think about it and hit it, it is a prosecutor's investigation that dusts out. It seems impossible work for Japanese media who rely on leak information. Foreign reporters must be oblivious to the outline of false charges.

Conspiracy visible from additional prosecution of Nissan Corporation

Nissan is the main culprit for the misrepresentation of securities. First, a corporation is subject to administrative sanctions, and then humans are fined for criminal penalties if the case is serious and severely damaged. Any criminal offense to a director must be all officers who have approved the securities report. Of course, it also includes internal auditors.There is no rational legal basis limited to Ghosn and Kelly in any way.The order of punishment is completely reversed, arbitrary and prejudiced. In particular, it clearly shows that the fact that the later prosecuted Nissan Corporation admitted the charges earlier was more conspiracy than anything else.Usually, Ghosn and Kelly are fighting, so it is reasonable that the remaining directors and officers of the same crime also fight.

The conspiracy was elaborated over a long period

It is obviously impossible to expulse Ghosn and Kelly from Nissan for false statements in the securities report. Because it is a formal offender. So the conspirators sought to blame for a more felony extrajudicial offense. Major crime Renault cannot defend Ghosn in this crime. Therefore The only way to gather evidence of special breach of crime is to arrest and prosecute Nissan headquarters or a foreign branch for any crime that could lead to a forced investigation.The excuse for this raid was the misrepresentation of a formal offender in falsely stating important matters in a securities report. However, he was arrested a crime that was not originally a crime and broke down before obtaining strong conclusive evidence of his special abuse. This case is a major case that remains in history as a false charge case in which prosecutors also influenced the fate of global companies.

Regulatory authorities to keep silence -The remaining questions-

The actions taken by the regulatory authorities are completely different between the crime of misrepresentation of important matters in securities and the crime of special breach. In fact, Gone's personal transaction, the transfer of financial derivatives, has been rectified by the SEC and has been corrected. The prosecutor nevertheless indicted. The first special allegation. The problem is the second alleged extradition.Due to the perfectly normal nature of the transaction, the existence of a pre-share agreement between Ghosn and the owner of the sales incentive distributor in order to be a criminal offender is in respect of the sales incentive paid ｒequired.This is, by nature, only complete confession evidence. Ghosn consistently argued that there was no such secret sharing agreement, but prosecutors forced a confession even after long-term detention. If the confession of the distributor owner does not exist, it is a complete false accusation.Ghosn's residence was restricted and no free behavior was allowed to prohibit contact with the owner.Over time, the truth will become clear, including the presence or absence of this owner's confession.