In October the Japanese government introduced a new law that would change how the government currently classifies documents which it considers vital state secrets. Under the proposed law the government could classify any document as secret for 5 years with an extension of up to 30 years based on the current governments understanding of what is or isn't a state secret.
The Liberal Democratic Party with its ruling coalition partner New Komeito control enough seats in the both chambers of Parliament to easily pass the bill into law. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe would prefer the legislation be enacted before the close of the current Diet session on December sixth.
All of Japan's opposition parties oppose the bill not just the principles of free speech but the complete lack of honest debate and what if any untended consequences could come to the fore with its enactment.
Even under the current system the amount of information made public is so small one would need an electron microscope just to find it. According to the New York Times between 2007 and 2011 the Defense Ministry destroyed an estimated 34,000 documents at the end of their classification period releasing one to the public.
Chapter 1 of the bill, published in Japanese by Asahi Shimbun Digital on October 25, refers to the “increasingly complex international situation,” making for the “growing importance of securing information related to national security.”
Under Chapter 2, Article 4, a “state secret” can initially be kept from the public for 5 years, with a possible extension of up to 30 years. Even after three decades, the cabinet can maintain an indefinite ban on its release.
The Liberal Democratic Party with its ruling coalition partner New Komeito control enough seats in the both chambers of Parliament to easily pass the bill into law. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe would prefer the legislation be enacted before the close of the current Diet session on December sixth.
All of Japan's opposition parties oppose the bill not just the principles of free speech but the complete lack of honest debate and what if any untended consequences could come to the fore with its enactment.
Even under the current system the amount of information made public is so small one would need an electron microscope just to find it. According to the New York Times between 2007 and 2011 the Defense Ministry destroyed an estimated 34,000 documents at the end of their classification period releasing one to the public.
Chapter 1 of the bill, published in Japanese by Asahi Shimbun Digital on October 25, refers to the “increasingly complex international situation,” making for the “growing importance of securing information related to national security.”
Under Chapter 2, Article 4, a “state secret” can initially be kept from the public for 5 years, with a possible extension of up to 30 years. Even after three decades, the cabinet can maintain an indefinite ban on its release.
Chapter 5 states that government employees and contractors entrusted with the state secrets, along with their families and relatives, will be subject to thorough investigation. Background checks will not only cover drug or alcohol abuse, mental states and financial situations, but also political views.
“Terrorism,” defined in the most sweeping terms, is used to justify the draconian law. Chapter 5, Article 12 refers to terrorism as “politically imposing differing ideologies on the country or the citizens.” JFBA lawyer Tsutomu Shimizu told the Japan Times that “such activities as the anti-nuclear rallies in front of the prime minister’s office could hence be categorised as terrorist acts.”
In a move aimed at muzzling the media, journalists can be jailed for up to five years for “wrongful” reporting of “state secrets.” A Foreign Correspondents Club of Japan statement expressed deep concern and urged the Diet to “either reject the bill completely or to substantially redraft it so that it ceases to pose a threat to both journalism and to the democratic future of Japan.”
Yukiko Miki was shocked in 2012 when she received the results of the information disclosure request she filed with the Cabinet Office seeking the minutes of meetings held to discuss the creation of a state secrets bill.
The meetings, attended by officials from various government agencies and other experts, took place from 2008 to 2009 under the then-ruling coalition government of the Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito. She had filed the request in 2011 under the national Freedom of Information Act because she couldn’t find any information on the meetings on the government website.
When she received the documents, most of the minutes, except for the front page, preface and postscript, were blacked out. Dissatisfied, she filed an administrative complaint only to be rebuffed by the Cabinet Office’s screening panel, which said the decision to withhold most of the information had been appropriate. Finally, she decided to sue the central government in July. The first court session was held last month.
No comments:
Post a Comment