|
The registration form
NSK News Bulletin Online
February 2004 ------------------------------------------------------------------- *Topics --Yomiuri Photographer Wins Chubu Grand Prix for Hostage-Taking Picture --Mainichi announces its online news site merger with MSN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Story of the Month>>> Media Seeks For More Information about SDF Activities in Iraq -------------------------------------------------------------------
The Office for Promotion of Judicial Reform on Jan. 29 outlined draft legislation for the government's new "lay judge" or partial jury system. The announcement followed a Jan. 26 agreement on the matter between the Liberal Democratic Party and its coalition partner, New Komeito. As demanded by NSK, the two coalition parties agreed to delete a contentious clause requiring media reporting on criminal cases not to prejudice jurors. But the parties continued to insist that people who have served as jurors be required to keep confidential all information regarding any case on which they serve. Regarding a clause on protecting personal information about jurors that NSK had criticized, the current draft maintains the media obligation not to identify jurors. It also says no one can publish any names, addresses or other facts that might reveal jurors' identities without their consent. In an earlier draft, courts could reveal jurors' names, but the coalition parties' agreement now allows only for the disclosure of the ages, occupations and other information that could not to lead to their individual identification. The government plans to submit the bill to the Diet in late February. As for the ratio of professional judges to jurors, the outline calls for three professional judges and six jurors to rule in general cases. Where a defendant admits to the charges and both the prosecution and defense have no objection, a court can hold a trial with just one professional judge and four jurors. The outline bans all media contact with sitting jurors aimed at obtaining confidential information on a case still under deliberation. It also bans all contact with former jurors aimed at getting confidential information they obtained while serving as jurors. But the draft law sets out no punishments for violations of these rules. Jurors are in turn prohibited from taking any actions that might impair public confidence in trials and from leaking any information, including the proceedings of deliberations and the arguments used in reaching verdicts. Releasing any such information, or opinions about such information could expose a juror to imprisonment or a fine. The precise terms of such punishment are yet to be decided, but the coalition agreement calls for specific penalties to ensure that jurors understand their obligation to keep secrets. These regulations mean that journalists' sole legal access to the proceedings of a trial after the fact will be to read the verdict and to hear the general "impressions" and "feelings" of jurors about the trial. Yoshiaki Tsuchiya, an editorial writer at Kyodo News who served as a member of the Lay Judge System Study Group said he appreciates the elimination of the clause on media reporting. He also welcomed the decision to allow the release of general personal information about jurors that would not reveal their identities. But Tsuchiya warned that there will be new moves to tighten the regulation of media activities if an NSK call for voluntary "guidelines on news-gathering and reporting activities under the new lay judge system" goes unheeded. He said all media organizations, including NSK and other bodies, should quickly set up such new reporting guidelines.
NSK on Dec. 25 asked the Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications for an end to the ban on any one media company owning a newspaper, AM radio station and TV broadcasting business. NSK submitted its written opinion in response to a ministry plan released Dec. 4 on easing media ownership regulations on running broadcasting stations under the Broadcast Law. The ban on so-called tripartite media ownership is intended to ensure local diversity in the sources of information in any single region. But NSK argued that the situation in the media has changed dramatically since the ban was put into effect and that diversity and pluralism in free speech and access to information will be safe regardless of any further tie-ups between newspapers and broadcasters. NSK said the government should explain with concrete examples how any such mergers might reduce the diversity of information sources. NSK maintains that regulations against newspaper companies and news agencies entering the broadcasting business constitute government interference with freedom of speech and of the press and could limit the people's right to know. NSK called for a full review of the government's policy against media ownership concentration, which covers the tripartite media ownership ban.
The Tokyo District Court on Jan. 13 found a comic book publisher guilty of obscenity. The presiding judge said the comic book in question violated the social norms of acceptability, and said the actions of the president of the publishing company warranted a one-year term in prison that he suspended for three years. It is the first ruling against a comic book under a law banning obscenity in literature. The defendant is appealing the ruling. The ruling said the defendant distributed about 20,000 copies of the comic book "Misshitsu" (Honey Room) containing explicit sex scenes in 2002. Citing moves to enact law to regulate pornographic material on the Internet, the ruling said there is a solid social consensus against the sale and distribution of obscene materials. The ruling said Criminal Code Article 175 on the sale and distribution of obscene literature has reasonable grounds for validity today to preserve a minimum level of sexual order and morality as well as to maintain sound sexual culture. The ruling said that compared with written words, comics provide a means of depiction capable of giving readers a stronger degree of sexual stimulation by visually appealing to readers' senses. The defense argued that making value judgments on the public's perceptions amounts to a violation of the freedom of thought and conscience, guaranteed by Article 19 of the Constitution, and runs counter to the ideological neutrality of the state. The defense said the state has no business protecting or coercively imposing any sort of value judgment or moral concept. The defense also maintained that it is a scientifically ungrounded vulgar belief that sales and distribution of obscene materials give rise to sex crimes. But following precedent set in previous rulings, including some rendered by the Supreme Court, the district court concluded that imposing some degree of constraint on the freedom of expression does not amount to a violation of the Constitution.
|
||||||||
