小沢氏起訴相当 「公判で真相」求めた審査会

The Yomiuri Shimbun (Apr. 29, 2010)
Panel wants truth about Ozawa uncovered
小沢氏起訴相当　「公判で真相」求めた審査会（4月28日付・読売社説）

An independent judicial panel of citizens threw down the gauntlet in challenging prosecutors who had decided not to indict Democratic Party of Japan Secretary General Ichiro Ozawa. We can only call this an exercise of the "good sense of citizens."
　民主党の小沢幹事長を「不起訴」とした検察の判断に、「善良な市民感覚」が強烈なノーを突き付けた形だ。

In a closely watched decision, the Tokyo No. 5 Committee for the Inquest of Prosecution, which comprised 11 citizens, agreed that Ozawa merits indictment over his fund management body's alleged false reporting of political funds, a step beyond a decision that would merely deem nonindictment as inappropriate.
　注目されていた検察審査会の議決は、「不起訴不当」から踏み込んで「起訴すべきだ」との結論になった。

The panel's decision reflects a clear commonsense judgment that calls for the clarification of the facts and determining where the responsibility lies as long as there are suspicions concerning Ozawa's involvement.
　小沢氏に疑わしい事実がある以上、裁判の場で事実関係と責任の所在を明らかにしてもらいたいという、極めて常識的な判断が投影されている。

As an initial step, prosecutors must reinvestigate the case thoroughly. If they decide not to indict Ozawa again, a judicial panel could decide for the second time that he merits indictment. Court-appointed lawyers could then indict him in place of prosecutors.
　検察は、まずは再捜査に全力を挙げるべきだ。
　その結果、再び不起訴でも、２回目の審査で起訴相当なら裁判所指定の弁護士による強制起訴となる。

Attention is now focused on whether prosecutors will reverse course and indict Ozawa, taking into account the panel's decision.
次の節目で検察が、議決を入れて起訴に踏み切るかどうかが注目される。

"I'm surprised by the unexpected result. I believe the prosecutors will make an appropriate judgment in the end," Ozawa said in response to the panel's decision. He should fulfill his accountability by answering the questions the panel raised.
　小沢氏は、議決を受けて「意外な結果で驚いている。検察が適正に判断すると信じている」と語った。小沢氏は審査会の指摘した疑惑については、説明責任を果たさなければならない。

===

Key to decision

The key to the panel's decision was its interpretations of a statement by House of Representatives member Tomohiro Ishikawa, who was in charge of clerical work at Ozawa's fund management organization, Rikuzan-kai, and others involved. Ishikawa has been indicted on charges of violating the Political Funds Control Law.
　審査会の判断のポイントは、小沢氏の資金管理団体「陸山会」の事務担当者だった石川知裕衆院議員（政治資金規正法違反で起訴）らの供述の評価だった。

Ishikawa told investigators of the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office he had informed Ozawa of his plan not to list 400 million yen in the management organization's political funds report, and obtained Ozawa's approval. Rikuzan-kai used most of the money to purchase a plot of land in Tokyo.
　石川被告は、陸山会が東京都内の土地代金などに充てた４億円について、収支報告書に記載しない方針を小沢氏に報告、了承を得たと東京地検に供述している。

However, Ozawa denied conspiring with Ishikawa, saying: "I don't know. I approved [the report], believing that the person in charge had recorded the facts."
　これに対し小沢氏は「知らない。担当者が真実を記載したと信じ、了承した」と共謀を否定した。

The prosecutors eventually decided not to indict Ozawa, concluding that Ishikawa's statement lacked substance. However, the judicial panel disagreed, calling Ozawa's statement "unreasonable and unnatural" and "hard to believe," based on Ishikawa's statement and other evidence.
　地検は、石川供述は具体性を欠くなどとして最終的に小沢氏の起訴を見送ったが、審査会は石川供述などを基に、小沢氏の弁明を「不合理・不自然で信用できない」と言い切っている。

The panel even went on to say Ozawa had "persistently covered up" the fact that he had provided the 400 million yen so as "not to have the media kick up a fuss about it."
　しかも、小沢氏が「マスコミに騒がれないための手段」として、４億円が自らの資金であることを隠蔽(いんぺい)する「執拗(しつよう)な偽装工作」をしたとも指摘している。

The panel, therefore, sought Ozawa's indictment from a different angle than the prosecutors, who put top priority on proving a suspect's guilt.
　有罪立証を第一に考える検察官とは違う視点で起訴を求めた。

===

'Good sense' shown

The inquest panel's citizens' "good sense" was clearly shown in the following statement:
　審査会の「市民感覚」が端的に表れているのは次の部分だ。

"Is it right not to question the responsibility of politicians whenever they insist they left the matter in question to their secretaries?
"As public distrust in politics and money is growing, the case cannot be ignored from the viewpoint of citizens."
　「秘書に任せていたと言えば、政治家の責任は問われなくて良いのか」「政治家とカネにまつわる政治不信が高まっている状況下、市民目線からは許し難い」


We believe such views are shared by many people.
　これらは多くの国民にも共通した思いだろう。

During the investigation of the Rikuzan-kai case, prosecutors were criticized for leaking information to the media.
　陸山会事件では「検察リーク」などの捜査批判も起きた。

Prosecutors must not be carried away by the feelings of citizens when conducting an investigation. But they should give explanations that satisfy the public.
市民感情に流されての捜査は禁物だが、検察にも、国民が納得できる説明が求められよう。

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, April 28, 2010)
（2010年4月28日01時19分 読売新聞）