Refusal of Supreme Court of Japan to Accept Childcare-related Case

INTRODUCTION

Is there incompetence and corruption in the Japanese judiciary? From what I have experienced firsthand, in my opinion, the answer is a resounding yes.

There has been an increasing exposure of systematic inadequacies in Japan with respect to childcare since I initially launched this lawsuit. More specifically, the issue relates to the process of gaining admission to nursery school as well as the shortage of openings at nursery schools.

Here is a link http://mainichi.jp/english/english/newsselect/news/20131111p2a00m0na007000c.html  to a recent article, “Doubts surround Abe administration's plans to eliminate childcare waiting lists” discussing the scenario in one of the 23 Wards of Tokyo, one of several in which what has been dubbed the “Childcare Uprising” in Japan is ongoing, and doubts about the government’s lip service response. The Japanese term is 保育所一揆 (literally, "Nursery School Uprising"). I will have to create a dedicated blog in Japanese for this at some point, but for now English only with documents in Japanese followed by gradual addition of translations of pertinent passages, and eventually all documents.

In the case detailed in this blog, which has spanned two years, I’d anticipated the members of the third petty bench of the Supreme Court of Japan to hand down a just verdict addressing each of the multiple violations of the Constitution and inconsistencies in the district and high court decisions with respect to precedents of the Supreme Court and other high courts.

It had been necessary to take the case to the Supreme Court because the respective trials at the district and high courts had served merely to cover up for the malfeasance with respect to which the decisions had been sought; that is to say, the decision of the district court served to cover up the corrupt practices of the city of Kyoto, and the decision of the high court served to cover up the unlawful aspects and misinterpretations of the law present in the decision of the district court.

The end result, however, was that the Supreme Court refused to even examine the case on the merits, dismissing it on grounds that are patently false. That is simply my opinion of the matter, which I shall endeavor to explicate in this blog, leaving a record for all that encounter similar malfeasance at the hands of any local administrative agency in Japan.

It should be noted that the city of Kyoto took several measures before the case went to trial at the district level and after the decision was handed down in order to attempt to paper over the illegal disposition and shortcomings of the agencies in question; however, those practices are still not fully conformant with the law. The problem is that unless they directly violate your rights, there is little ground on which to pursue legal action.

The unfortunate and cowardly decision of the Supreme Court of Japan has necessitated that I present the facts of the case and explain each stage to the public myself. A decision examining the merits would undoubtedly have provided ample precedent for upholding the laws of Japan—including the Constitution—by seeing the judiciary fulfill its role in checking the abuse of power by administrative agencies managed by the executive branch. There would have been no way possible to examine the circumstances of the case as set forth in petitions submitted to the Supreme Court. And since there are clear precedents of the Supreme Court itself pertaining to the violation of Constitutional rights, I think that the reader with arrive at the same conclusion at me that the decision to dismiss this case was politically motivated.

Japan, like the US and the UK, is not a signatory to the Optional Protocol 1 http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/ProfessionalInterest/ccpr-one.pdf http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Issues/HRIndicators/Ratification//Status_OP1_ICCPR.pdf of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/CCPR/Pages/CCPRIndex.aspx; accordingly, the Supreme Court was the last stop with respect to government institutions capable of redressing the problem. 

The Supreme Court of Japan has failed to meet my expectations in performing its role in the governmental system, which, like that of the USA, is based on the concept of the separation of powers. Hence, publicity is the only tool left in the system of checks and balances. The objective of this blog is to expose the details of this case to public scrutiny to the extent possible.

Perhaps this Odyssey through the netherworld of the Japanese judicial system this would make good material for a screen play, but for now there is too much non-fictional matter to be laid out. As will be described below, I am not the first foreigner to have run into problems with administrative procedure and due process, but the case described in this blog is perhaps the most egregious on record. By refusing to accept the case and examine it on the merits, the Supreme Court of Japan has effectively shut it away from the eyes of the public. The case was, of course, a matter of substantial gravity for me and my family, but it relates to public law and corruption in officialdom. Accordingly, the Supreme Court of Japan, in failing to carry out its duty has left the burden of informing the public of the deplorable state of affairs—including that the Supreme Court appears to have failed to act on a valid petition without reason.

Feel free to ask questions as well as draw your own conclusions and voice your opinion here.