Suites données aux recommandations du comité et du Conseil d’administration - Rapport No. 346, Juin 2007

Effect given to the recommendations of the Committee and the Governing Body

1. 101. The Committee last examined this case, which concerns the arrest and detention of trade union officers and members, massive searches of trade union offices and residences of trade union leaders, and the confiscation of trade union property, at its June 2006 meeting. The Committee noted that no proceedings had been filed against the three persons involved in the Tokyo Station incident, though two cases were pending against members of the complainant organization, the Japan Confederation of Railway Workers’ Unions (JRU), for embezzlement of union funds and for events arising out of the Urawa Train Depot incident, respectively. It also noted the various legal proceedings against the authorities for state liability, unreasonable searches and confiscation, search of private residences, arbitrary interference with the JRU’s operations, and abuse of power. The Committee requested the Government to keep it informed of developments respecting the above proceedings and provide it with the judgements as soon as they were issued. It also requested the Government to provide its observations on the complainant’s allegations that the police gave misleading information on the number of items returned to the complainant, and that the judicial process in the cases it has filed against the authorities have been unfair, as evinced by the replacements of judges, long delays and multiple hearings [see 342nd Report, paras 116–122].
2. 102. In its communication of 5 July 2006, the complainant states, with respect to the case concerning compensatory damages for illegal search and seizure brought by the complainant against the Government, that on 30 June 2006 the Tokyo District Court issued a judgement recognizing some of the complainant’s claims while dismissing the others. In particular, the court judged the seizure of 40 items illegitimate and ordered the Tokyo Metropolitan Government (TMG) to pay compensation. A copy of the judgement is attached to the communication.
3. 103. In its 19 February 2007 communication, the complainant alleges that on 15 February the Public Safety Bureau of the Tokyo Police raided the JRU premises again, searching a JRU office and confiscating 665 items. The complainant states that in the case concerning state liability for compensation with respect to previous seizures of documents, despite repeated urgings by the presiding judge, the Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) has yet to explain the linkage between the confiscated items and the case in connection with which they were confiscated. The complainant adds that on 21 February 2007, the prosecutors will make their summations and recommendations for sentencing in the Urawa Train Depot incident, in which seven members of the East Japan Railway Workers’ Union were arrested in 2002.
4. 104. In a communication dated 6 March 2007, the Government states that, of the 1,870 items seized by the MPD in connection with the Urawa Train Depot case, 1,161 have been returned to the complainant, and 13 items can be retrieved at any time. The remaining items will be returned when, in the course of the trial, it is appropriate to do so. As for the items seized in connection with the Tokyo Station incident, all 1,039 of them have been returned, except for 22 items seized again by the MPD because of their necessity in the investigation of another case.
5. 105. As regards the action concerning state liability for compensation brought by the Japan Railway Welfare Association (JRWA) against the Government and the TMG, the Government indicates that on 30 June 2006 the Tokyo District Court dismissed the compensation claims, but recognized part of the plaintiff’s claims. The JRWA and the TMG appealed the decision on 12 July and 14 July 2006, respectively; it is currently being heard in the Tokyo High Court.
6. 106. With regard to the action concerning state liability for compensation brought by the complainant against the Government and the TMG, the Government states that the Tokyo District Court dismissed the complainant’s compensation claims. The Government adds, with respect to the events of 7 December 2005, that the MPD conducted searches of JRU offices and other venues on suspicion of embezzlement, based on search warrants issued by the judge after strict judicial examination in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure. The embezzlement case is presently under investigation, and the MPD has returned some of the seized items deemed less important to the case.
7. 107. In communications dated 30 April and 9 May 2007, the Government adds, with respect to the action concerning state liability for compensation brought by the complainant against the Government and the TMG, that on 9 March 2007 the complainant appealed the Tokyo District Court’s dismissal of its compensation claims; the case is currently before the High Court. The Government also indicates that the searches of JRU offices and facilities on
8. 15 and 19 February 2007 were conducted by the MPD based on search warrants issued by the judge after strict judicial examination, in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure.
9. 108. The Committee notes the information provided by the complainant and the Government, including the fact that: (1) the JRWA’s claim for compensation had been partially recognized and partially dismissed by the Tokyo District Court, and (2) the JRU’s compensation claim had been dismissed by the same court. Noting that both cases were now before the Tokyo High Court on appeal, the Committee requests the Government to transmit copies of the High Court’s decisions once they are handed down. The Committee also requests the Government to provide its observations with respect to the complainant’s allegations concerning a 2005 search in which over 2,000 basic union documents were seized, and were still yet to be returned.