Court Finds Failing in Disclosure of Evidence Illegal
Kumamoto District Court ordered the government of Japan to pay 23 million yen to the plaintiffs of Matsubase Case in 1985. The court recognized illegal activities in investigation of the public prosecutors and accused them of failing in disclosure of important information which was closely related to decision of the court. The decision may ignite discussion over disclosure of evidence by organizations of law enforcement.
A man was found killed in the town of Matsubase in Kumamoto prefecture in 1985. The police arrested his acquaintance, Koki Miyata, with suspicion of murder, based on his confession. Although Miyata retracted his confession, he was indicted and the sentence of 13 years in prison was confirmed by the Supreme Court in 1990.
The public prosecutors had been arguing that Miyata burnt out a shirt used in the murder. However, the lawyers for Miyata found a part of that shirt in 1997, which was the only evidence of the crime. The lawyers for Miyata requested a retrial, but it started in 2016, 19 years after the first request. The Supreme Court finally found Miyata innocent in 2019. Miyata died at 87 in 2020, soon after he filed a lawsuit against the government of Japan. The lawsuit was succeeded by his families.
Kumamoto District Court found that the public prosecutors maintained the trial ignoring a critical doubt in the evidence which basically consisted a charge of crime. “It violated the obligation of being cautious for public prosecutor to cooperate with the court which was trying to find a truth,” said the court. The court accused the public prosecutors of not reconfirming Miyata about the shirt in the trials.
The case raised a problem in investigation on crimes, which has heavily been dependent on confession from suspects. The public prosecutors indicted Miyata with his confession that he killed the man using the shirt covering a knife and burnt it. After Miyata backed off his words, they did not present any alternative evidence.
False accusation often occurs when public prosecutors rely on confession. All of four major wrongful convictions -- Menda Case in 1948, Saitagawa Case in 1950, Matsuyama Case in 1955 and Shimada Case in 1954 -- were made by confessions coerced by public prosecutors. The suspects survived death penalty.
Public prosecutors are always reluctant to accept a request of disclosure of evidence. In Fukawa Case in 1967, the lawyers requested disclosure of evidence, but it took 9 years to start the retrial. The defendant was found innocent after 34 years from the arrest. In Hakamada Case in 1966, in which the public prosecutors fabricated evidences, the defendant was released after 48 years of detention.
Minister of Justice, Keisuke Suzuki, announced that the ministry would reconsider the system of retrial. Disclosure of evidence and dispute of public prosecutors against request of retrial will be discussed in a consultative council for the minister. It will be paid attention whether current dominance of public prosecutors in crime investigation will be changed or not.
Comments
Post a Comment