This is what former KADOKAWA chairman Tsuguhiko Kadokawa was reportedly told while in detention. Having experienced the same detention center, I find it hard to believe such a statement was made. Detention center staff typically ask questions like, “Does your lawyer think you’ll get a prison sentence?” They want to know if the person is likely to be sentenced to prison or if they might avoid it.
If a prison sentence is likely, the detainee is closely monitored and subjected to strict regulations to minimize the shock of moving to prison. It’s almost like a preparation period for prison, as if the sentence has already begun. Conversely, those expected to be released may sit cross-legged on cushions or break minor rules, such as not adhering to bedtime, without facing repercussions. Hearing, “You will be treated as a prisoner,” from detention staff would indeed be shocking.
Mr. Kadokawa, who has a serious illness and underwent major surgery, refused to sign or stamp any statements, which is astonishing. I, too, was a patient with a serious illness, but I cooperated somewhat with the investigation, far from exhibiting Mr. Kadokawa’s iron will. He endured human rights abuses and was released on bail after 226 days of detention, the same as me, which is commendable.
Additionally, in the article by the famous judicial exam cram school head, Makoto Ito, it states:
The German Constitution (Basic Law for the Federal Republic of Germany) reflects harsh lessons from the Nazi era concentration camps, stating in Article 1, Section 1 that “human dignity shall be inviolable” and in Article 2, Section 2 that “personal freedom shall be inviolable.” Personal freedom is guaranteed even before freedoms like expression or economic freedoms.
How about Japan? Pre-war criminal procedures treated suspects as mere objects of interrogation, leading to severe human rights abuses like torture and forced confessions. Reflecting on this, the Japanese Constitution allocates a third of its human rights provisions to protecting rights in criminal procedures, aiming to break away from pre-war practices. However, in practice, there has been no clear departure from pre-war methods, and personal freedom is still taken too lightly.
There is a stark difference between how Germany and Japan, both defeated countries, implement their criminal procedures. The way Japan casually deprives personal freedom and social standing is incomprehensible to other developed countries.
The importance of personal freedom as a prerequisite for overall human rights protection is easily understood. Physical detention restricts not only economic activities like employment but also participation in gatherings and family life. Restricting personal freedom inevitably limits economic and mental freedoms. Hence, it is said that “without the guarantee of personal freedom, liberty itself cannot exist.” In this sense, personal freedom is a fundamental human right, essential for the protection of all other rights.
This practice of depriving personal freedom first and then making individuals comply with authorities is what is uniquely referred to as “hostage justice” in Japan.
For example, consider a translator for Shohei Ohtani, who was trusted but allegedly stole about 2.6 billion yen, deceiving banks and Ohtani himself. It seems absurd that such a person can work freely while being accused. Similarly, some people believe that Carlos Ghosn, who is considered a criminal, should remain detained indefinitely. We need to rethink what should be standard in the judicial world, what the global standards are, and broaden our perspectives based on constitutional principles.
The notion that “bad people deserve whatever happens to them” must not overshadow the process of determining guilt and the perspective of human rights protection. If you are from overseas, you should know that what is considered normal in your country is not necessarily normal in Japan, which harbors very dangerous practices.
Comments