...cut back from the chase, it leads nowhere

In the insomniacal daze ensuing from the shock of the ruling and all of its ramifications, I misread an aspect of he law I mentioned in the last post that the 3rd petty bench appeared to have violated--which I had bee pondering with respect to possibly constituting grounds for a retrial. That misconstrued reading was somewhat bewildering, so I posted it in a bemused state.

The simple fact of the matter is that the law refers to a "decision", in the formal legal sense of the word, whereas the case was decided by the court by issuing an "order" in the formal legal sense of the word, dismissing the case with prejudice against the merits.

That doesn't mean that the ruling wasn't a clear miscarriage of justice with serious implications--it was. It just means that by employing that dismissal order instead of examining the case on the merits and giving reasons for any decision they might make, they took an expedient measure for political purposes.

I will proceed to present an examination of the various salient points and violations of numerous laws and statutes as well as Supreme Court precedents. The misconstrual that lead to me to post the "Cut to the chase" post relates to the Supreme Court precedents. The reason for that it because they represent concrete interpretations of laws against factual circumstances relating to a lawsuit as opposed to an abstract interpretation of an Article of the Constitution and an arbitrary application of that interpretation. It's more difficult to argue against such an interpretation, but in the case of the precedents, the field is more narrow, facilitating examination from different factual angles.

The justices of the 3rd petty bench has sought to hide those facts and the related violations of the laws and precedents by not examining the case on the merits, and not posting the decisions from either the Kyoto district court trial or the Osaka high court trial on the public website hosting the precedent database. 

I will provide not only the decisions but all of the court filings and pertinent evidence documents.

The LDP-Komeito administration led by Abe is a menace to civil society in Japan, and though the voters didn't have much of a selection to chose from, the damage already caused by the LDP-Komeito coalition is far reaching, and they are in office until 2016, as it stands.