“Japanese Government Granted Indulgence to Nuclear Reactor Builders”ーChristian Today

Ｃｈｒｉｓｔｉａｎ　Ｔｏｄａｙ　　2016/7/15

「国家が免罪符」賠償求めた牧師ら、棄却で控訴

世界的不買・投資引き上げ・制裁を呼び掛け

http://oklos-che.blogspot.jp/2016/07/chirsitian-today.html

朝日新聞、東京新聞日本経済新聞など各社が７月１３日の、東京地裁の原発メーカー訴訟の判決を報道しましたが、そのどれもが実際に判決を読まずに報道していました。なぜ、わかるのか？　それは判決は、原告弁護団と、本人訴訟団へのふたつの判決を下していたのに、その事実、及びその判決の違いを気づき、記事にしていなかったからです。その中で唯一、二つの原告当事者の主張を取り上げたのは、Chiristian Today１社でした。

記事の内容は上のＵＲＬから本文をお読みください。この英訳は、本人訴訟団の一人、Ｙ氏による翻訳です。私のブログを読んでくださる海外の読者の為に掲載することにしました。
Native Checkを受けていませんが、時間を優先させ、早く世界の原発メーカー訴訟の結果を正確に知りたいと思っている人たちに早く届けることを最優先しました。英語を母国語にされている方々からのアドバイスを受けて、その都度、修正していきます。判決の根本的な問題はどこにあったのか、みなさんでご確認いただきたいと思います。

真実を報道した唯一のメディア、Chirsitian Today,　判決の本質は何であったのか？

http://oklos-che.blogspot.jp/2016/07/chirsitian-today.html

　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　　崔　勝久

ーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーーー

11:11, Friday, July 15, 2016

“Japanese Government Granted Indulgence

to Nuclear Reactor Builders”

Priests who had demanded reparation for Fukushima nuclear accident, after dismissal sentence by District Court, decided to appeal to a higher court, called out to the public for BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction)

Hisash Yukimoto

Writer Kim (Korean Minjung Theologian), Koichi Kimura (The representative of Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB) Pro Se Litigation Team) watching over Kim fondly, Choi Seungkoo (The Secretary General of Pro Se Litigation Team), Nobuo Watanabe (The Chairman of CAANRB) , at judicial press club in, Kasumigaseki, Tokyo, on Wednesday, July 13, 2016..

Trying to pin the blame on nuclear reactors builders for the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant accident, the plaintiffs (Christian priests, theologians, and Christians) bring a case before a court against defendant three companies (TOSHIBA Corporation (hereinafter TOSHIBA), Hitachi, Ltd (hereinafter HITACHI), and General Electric Company (hereinafter GE)). Tokyo District Court, on Wednesday, July 13, 2016, dismissed this case against the plaintiffs, and rejected the demand.

Then, on the same day, upon this statement, the plaintiffs immediately indicate to the press corps at judicial press club at Tokyo District Court (at Kasumigaseki, Tokyo), their intention to bring an intermediate appeal to a higher court, with the announcement of developing the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction) campaigns in world scale against the nuclear reactor builders.

The names of these plaintiffs are Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB) Pro Se Litigation Team (Contact: Funabashi-shi, Chiba Prefecture). In this lawsuit, the plaintiffs wishes for nukes abolition and strongly had asserted that: i) nuclear power plants are unconstitutional and Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law was unconstitutionally enacted, ii) the nuclear power plants operations are against public order and morals and illegal, lapsable action, iii) the nuclear power plants brought emotional distress and spiritual damage to world people.

Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law, Chapter 1: General Provisions (Purpose) Article 1 reads;

The purpose of this law is to prescribe and make the fundamental system on damages in case of nuclear damages (due to nuclear reactor operations and so on), to protect the victims, and to contribute to the sound development of nuclear industry.

And Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law, Chapter 2: Nuclear Power Casualty and Liability (No-fault (strict) liability, legal channeling of liability, and so on) Article 4 reads;

“In case of the previous article, the persons other than the nuclear operators who are to blame for reparation for damages according to the provisions stipulated in the same article shall not be responsible for the reparation for injury.” “The provisions in the Product Liability Act shall not be applied to the … the nuclear damages arisen from nuclear reactor operations and so on.”

Nobuo Watanabe (The Chairman of CAANRB and the ex-pastor of Tokyo Kokuhaku Church of the United Church of Crist in Japan) explained to the press corps, “The concept ‘the right of resistance’ which declares that the Christianity after Reformation has the rights to resist in the Roman Catholic Church system established in the A.D. 16^th century. Today, this concept is stretched to be interpreted that any human being, both believer and non-believer, has the right to resistance as humans.”

Mr. Watanabe, the Calvinistic theologian and the author of “Right of Resistance based on Christianity” (Word of Life Press Ministries, 2016) and many other books, told, “I think this theory of the right of resistance can be greatly utilized for this nuclear suit CAANRB. We decides today’s judgement is unjust and would like to declare that we have the right to refute against this unfair ruling.”

Choi Seungkoo (The Secretary General of Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders, and also the Christian in Japan Alliance Christ Church) said to the press corps concerning the details of the ruling, “ The summary contents of this today’s Tokyo District Court decision is that although the Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB) insists that the whole damages related to cause-in-fact, without limited to legally sufficient cause, should be found, but this is the plaintiffs’ original and unique view point and may not and shall not be adopted by the court. We strongly protest against this court decision.”

“That is to say,’ who in the world decided the standard of legally sufficient cause!?’ Japan as the State makes all of its own standards, and the State insists by itself that the court in this State won’t find the issue as the cause-and-effect if it is beyond the scope of this State standard! We regard the existence of this standard itself as a problem when we sue for emotional distress (spiritual damages),” said Mr. Choi Seungkoo. “So, we assert that the court’s ruling evaluation for our view as original and unique is totally wrong even though we seek the cause-in-fact concerning worldwide facts, the facts themselves that have happened. Actually, also, Tokyo District Court clarified that its court can judge in various ways also for cause-and-effect relationships. Accordingly, the insistence of their limiting the scope of standards to the legally sufficient cause is itself one-sided one. Their insistence itself (that they will not evaluate the issue as cause-and-effect if it is beyond their setting standards) is totally strange. If they admit our cause-in-fact as cause-and-effect relationship, they must compensate for Fukushima nuclear accident and others. So this is the cause for State and court ignore (not takes responsibility) for Fukushima and other nuclear victims.”

“We appeal to higher court against this judgement because this is that the judges decided not to admit the (emotional distress and) spiritual damage we sought due to the standards they themselves had made, which means they cannot find our cause as the cause-and-effect relationship because it is beyond the framework they had set. The judges are expected to and should admit cause-and effect relationship based on the facts happening now according to world standard. But ruling today does admit only the cause-and-effect relationship as the major premise based on the cause-and-effect relationship judged only by the adaptability to the standards made by themselves, but does not find the cause-and-effect relationship beyond the standards the State itself made. This judgement is fundamentally wrong!” criticized Mr. Choi Seungkoo.

“We assert that the nuclear power plants are unconstitutional, and that the business agreements between nuclear operators (TEPCO and/or other nuclear operators) and nuclear reactor builders are lapsable, but the judge made no rebuttal. So, we’d like to appeal to a higher court and would like to unrelentingly pursuit the view by the higher court and the responsibilities to be borne by the nuclear reactor builders,” said Mr. Choi Seungkoo.

Also, Mr. Choi Seungkoo added, “We plan both to conduct campaigns for international solidarity movement outside of the court and with this, to pursuit the responsibilities which should be taken by the nuclear reactor builders.”

Koich Kimura, one of the nine Selected Parties (*Note 1 at the end of the article) and the representative of the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB) Pro Se Litigation Team and also, Associate Pastor of Fukuoka International Church, Japan Baptist Convention, announced, “We call into question the very problem of the usage of nuclear energy which we humans are intractable or uncontrollable. Actually, we began the boycott campaign of TOSHIBA products at Yurakucho and at Shimbashi. Today is the first day of this movement and we are schedule to develop the very worldwide campaign from now on.”

Mr. Kimura criticized, “Particularly, TOSHIBA is now in the midst of sales negotiations over 64 nuclear reactor units. With these business negotiations, TOSHIBA is the leading runner of world nuclear reactor builders. After Fukushima accident, the nuclear power plants construction is very difficult. So there begins the way of exporting nuclear reactors to make profits. The whole world questioned Japanese on this as a matter of our Japanese conscience. What in the world has been happening with the Japanese conscience and a sense of morality?  i.e. Japanese are now earning money at the sacrifice of other countries people. I believe we Japanese will not admit of this. Nuclear reactor builders gain only profits and we Japanese people must take on their risks and must pay for them. Such a business should not be allowed in capitalism society. That is because very principle of competition does not come into effect.”

“We will carry on the global campaigns for the boycott (on products) and the divestment targeting TOSHIBA. These campaigns do not eye for the bankruptcy of TOSHIBA. We’d like you to understand that these are the campaigns for (guiding) TOSHIBA to returning to peace (non-military) industry,” Mr. Kimura explained the intention of the campaigns.

“The government has now come to the point of issuing an indulgence named as Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law. Five hundred years ago, Roman Catholic Church put out indulgences. But now, the States, not the Church, are issuing indulgences. And the States prepares the nuclear power plants system and the States and nuclear industries integrated to promote this deviation. Japan is planning to export FUKUSHIMA. We Japanese can’t overlook this outrageous behavior in our conscience,” Mr. Kimura, the coauthor of “Let’s Dispense with Nuclear Power,” (another writer is Hiroki Nonaka, pastor) (published in 2014 with Word of Life Press Ministries).

Yong-Bok Kim (Minjung Theologian coming from Korea, and Chancellor of Asia Pacific Graduate School for the Study of Life) told the press corps through an interpreter, “I believe even anywhere in the world, the destiny of nuclear victims are one. So, all hibakushas (radiation or nuclear victims) problems must be attributed to one issue. This is where the inevitability and necessity for solidarity on the problem of all the hibakushas in the world.”

“This problem with hibakushas and nuclear victims is the most tragic and the worst one that was generated by the Second World War. But, now in northeast Asia, the keen competition relating to nuclear issues among each of the countries exists, and to produce nukes (nuclear powers and nuclear weapons), we northeast Asian are coming to the situation that we think to use this as the means of trades. It can be said that the countries now producing nuclear weapons and generating nuclear power as energy are all extrajudicial and extralegal,” Dr. Yong-Bok Kim then told reporters.

“Upon the judgement today, I believe this eludes law and can’t accept it as the rulings with judicial responsibility. The sales talks of nuclear power such as peaceful use and as the means of improving our lives are in fact far from reality and are only an excuse,” Dr. Yong-Bok Kim attacked.

“So we consider developing global solidarity campaigns with two strategies. The first one is nonviolent and peaceful resistance. BDS is an example. So, from August 6^th through Aug.8^th we are scheduled to carefully work out a strategy to develop this campaign together in solidarity, gathering together in Korea with Japanese party. Another strategy target is clear. That is the objective to indemnify (ensure safety for) all the lives of living organisms against radiation. Today these living organisms suffered in various ways, becoming a victim to nuclear power. So we have the perspective on this second strategy, which is to carry on our campaigns through the process of lives’ being truly healed and recovered from the victimized situation, and to reconcile with each other through the activities of both countries, targeting it at enjoying our lives,” Dr. Yong-Bok Kim said.

Dr. Yong-Bok Kim concluded, “So we’d like to develop this campaigns globally without despair and with hope and passion.”

The proposer groups of these campaigns are: i) Antinuclear Cristian Network (ANCN), Korea, and Asia Peace Citizen Network (APCN), both in Korean side, ii) No Nukes Asia Action (NNAA) and Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB) Pro Se Litigation Team, both in Japanese side.

According to Mr. Choi Seungkoo, the twenty members of Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB) Pro Se Litigation Team are going to visit Korea from August 4^th through August 8^th, to attend the press conference with Korean hibakshas, and to bring a case before a Korean court against US government to take them to task for responsibility for dropping atomic bombs for the first time in the world. “We can’t do this in Japan,” said Mr. Choi Seungkoo.

In the judgement this time, Tokyo District Court judged not to be able to find the unconstitutionality of “the legal channeling of liability in Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law” because this system (legal channeling of liability) are not admitted to be unconstitutional for the violation of the No Nukes Rights (which are the rights the plaintiffs of this CAANRB insisted), and held that this system can’t be said not to be rational for the recovery of the damages, that it is within the limit of legislative discretion and that it shall not violate property rights.

Upon the right to equality, Tokyo District Court ruled that this system (the legal channeling of liability) shall not be the discrimination against the nuclear victims without rational reason, and upon the right of access to the court, this court held, as a result of having applied this Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law, to the extent this law is not unconstitutional and/or is not lapsable, that the law itself cannot be said that it shall violate the victims’ right of access to the court.

On the constituting the abuse of a right when the defendants assert that they should be granted immunity from responsibility by this system, the same court ruled that: because, according to Atomic Energy Damage Compensation Law, the defendants shall not bear responsibilities, and the plaintiffs’ right to claim damages or losses against defendants shall be attributed to no possibility for exercise, as a result, because these reasons do not lead to the interpretation that the defendants are exercising any right, and in conclusion, the plaintiffs’ contention itself shall be unjust and unreasonable.

For the reason above, the same court (Tokyo District Court) judged that the plaintiffs’ claim shall be dismissed.

In addition, the same court dismissed the suit concerning obligees’ subrogation right on the following reason:

i) Because there are no indications for debtor TEPCO that it is in a situation in which its debts substantially exceed assets, ii) because TEPCO is not in an insolvent  condition, and iii) consequently, “standing to sue (due to the necessity for protection of account receivables)” shall not be found by the court.

In the 4^th court hearing (oral proceedings) held on March 23th, 2016, the presiding judge stated, “The trial will be concluded,” and he announced the judgement to be sentenced on July 13, 2016.

The members of Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders demonstrate, with wide spread banners, which read “No Nuclear Export! Boycott TOSHIBA Products!” in Japanese, Korean, and English, near a volume-sales electrical appliance store “BIC CAMERA Yurakucho Store,” in front of JR Yurakucho Station, on July 13^th, 2016.

Before the judgement this time, Mr. Kimura, Dr. Kim, Mr. Choi and other members, around the daytim, the same day, in a drizzle, demonstrated, with wide spread banners, which read “No Nuclear Export! Boycott TOSHIBA Products!” in Japanese, Korean, and English, against nuclear exporting companies (or future nuclear export companies) TOSHIBA, HITACHI, and MITSUBISHI HEAVY INDUSTRIES, LTD (hearinafter MITSUBISHI), near a volume-sales electrical appliance store “BIC CAMERA Yurakucho Store” near JR Yurakucho Station (Chiyoda ward, Tokyo), and JR Shimbashi Station (in Minato ward as the same). But those who listened to the speech in the demonstration and who received the leaflets distributed by them were not so many, and a lot of people passed by.

Mr. Kimura explained on this demonstration that their target was not be BIC CAMERA, but nuclear reactor builders, particularly, TOSHIBA, and their objective was that, by raising their voices, these nuclear companies would turn into peace and non-military industry companies.

The leaflets the members of Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders had distributed at daytime, on July 13^th, near JR Yurakucho Station and JR Shimbashi Station.

Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders (CAANRB), in its official site, explained, “There was a dispute between one party (several dozen plaintiffs) and the other party (a team of plaintiffs’ attorneys), relating to what CAANRB movement should be and also, to the way the trial proceedings should be progressed. The plaintiffs’ attorney team resigned as “the attorney for two plaintiffs, Park Jong Seok, and Choi Seungkoo.” The attorney team’s outrageous move causes the several dozen plaintiffs who sympathized with Park and Choi to dismiss the plaintiff attorney team, together with Park and Choi, to organize ‘Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders.’” They say their Pro Se Litigation Team tried this case with means of bifurcated trial, which is a trial tried and had its ruling in a separate courtroom.

*Note 1: According to Pro Se Litigation Team in the Class Action against Nuclear Reactor Builders, the Pro Se Litigation Team plaintiffs utilizes “Selected Party System” prescribed in the Civil Proceedings Law (the Code of Civil Procedure) Article 30, selected nine Selected Parties in Japan and overseas, are now fighting for the trial in the form of Pro Se Litigation, and its Appointing Party numbers are currently up to forty. In the same Article, it is provided, “A number of persons who share common interests and do not fall under the provision of the previous Article may appoint, from among them, one or more persons as parties to stand as plaintiffs or defendants on behalf of all.”