Thanks to the crowdfunding campaign initiated by CALL4, the two lawsuits in Yugawara, fought for over three years, have achieved significant results and have concluded successfully. On behalf of the eight-member legal team representing the two lawsuits, I would like to report on the outcome and express our gratitude.

1. The "Three-Legged Race" of Two Lawsuits

The "Claim for Annulment of Legislative Punishment" filed by Yukiko Tsuchiya and the "Claim for Disclosure of Secret Meeting Minutes" filed by the Yugawara Residents' Ombudsman pursued the same goal through different methods, forming a "three-legged race."

Both lawsuits sought a court decision on what constitutes the "secrets" of council meetings that should not be disclosed to residents.

The controversial statement by Ms. Tsuchiya was: "Isn't it a problem that the personal information list of all delinquent taxpayers in Yugawara Town has been shared with council members and has not been collected?" The town council punished Ms. Tsuchiya, claiming this statement revealed "meeting secrets." The town council argues that any discussion within a "secret meeting" is considered a "secret," without any substantial criteria.

Additionally, when the Ombudsman requested the disclosure of non-personal information parts of the secret meeting minutes, the town council refused, asserting that the entirety of the secret meeting proceedings, regardless of content, must remain confidential.

The Ombudsman argued that it is illegal to withhold the entire minutes since there should be parts that do not qualify as secrets. Similarly, Ms. Tsuchiya contended that the fact of distributing or collecting the delinquent taxpayer list does not constitute a secret, and therefore, the punishment was unwarranted.

2. Landmark Judgment on the Publicity of Secret Meeting Minutes

The Ombudsman's lawsuit for the disclosure of secret meeting minutes, initially fully withheld (February 26, 2021), was filed on January 30, 2023, after the court ordered a redo due to "inadequate justification." On March 27, this year, the Yokohama District Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.

The court accepted the plaintiff's argument that even secret meetings should include "objective explanations of the current status of delinquencies and responses to them," which do not qualify as confidential information. The Yugawara Town Information Disclosure Review Board had twice issued similar recommendations, making the judgment appear common-sense, although unprecedented as a legal precedent. The town council decided not to appeal and identified the parts to be disclosed. The Ombudsman received the disclosed information on June 10.

3. Yokohama District Court's Decision in Favor of Ms. Tsuchiya and High Court's Evasion

In the "Tsuchiya Lawsuit," the Yokohama District Court (February 1, 2023) ruled that the fact that the delinquent taxpayer list was not collected does not constitute a secret, and the article in "Council Yugawara" that reported this was false and defamatory. The court ordered damages and a public apology.

However, the high court minimized the issue, stating that as long as the council deemed Ms. Tsuchiya's statement as part of "secret meeting proceedings," the article could not be considered unjust, thereby avoiding a direct ruling on the matter.

Although it is unfortunate that the high court did not uphold the district court's level of judgment, Ms. Tsuchiya, who resigned as a council member in February last year, ran again in the town council elections this April and was re-elected with the highest number of votes.

4. Outcomes of the Struggle

Notably, the holding of secret meetings and the distribution of delinquent taxpayer lists by the town council have been suspended since December 2020.

This outcome is undeniably a result of the establishment of the Ombudsman in the community, the filing of the two lawsuits, and the support received from people nationwide.

June 11, 2024
Attorney Takashi Okawa

Although a little late, we would like to report the following:

Yukiko Tsuchiya (then a town council member) was disciplined by the Yugawara Town Council and forced to apologize for leaking the minutes of a secret meeting in relation to her comments during a general question period (September 7, 2020) in which she stated that a list of Yugawara Town delinquent taxpayers had been distributed to the Yugawara Town Council Special Committee on Strengthening Measures for Collection of Town Taxes, etc., but had not been collected, as well as her posts on social media quoting an article from the Kanagawa Shimbun newspaper that reported on the matter.

Councilman Tsuchiya refused to read the letter of apology and was further punished by being suspended for one day by the Yugawara Town Council. The Yugawara Town Council published a feature article about the punishment of Councilman Tsuchiya in the council newsletter "Giyugawara" No. 116 (November 2020 issue).

In response, the Yokohama District Court (Judgment dated February 1, 2023) found that Councilman Tsuchiya's public announcement that the delinquent taxpayer list had not been collected did not violate Article 92, Paragraph 2 of the Yugawara Town Council Rules of Meeting ("No person shall disclose the proceedings of a secret meeting as long as confidentiality continues."). The Yokohama District Court then ordered the defendant, Yugawara Town, to pay 200,000 yen in damages for the defamation of Mr. Tsuchiya by "Gifu Yugawara" and to publish an apology advertisement in "Gifu Yugawara."

However, the Tokyo High Court ruled on October 12, 2023, overturning the Yokohama District Court ruling and dismissing Mr. Tsuchiya's claim. On the 16th of the same month, Mr. Tsuchiya filed an appeal to the Supreme Court.

On March 8th of this year, the Supreme Court's Second Petty Bench (Chief Justice Akira Ojima) decided not to accept the appeal. The only reason given was that the case was not recognized as being acceptable under Article 318, Paragraph 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure.

By adopting the judgment of the Yugawara Town Council as a given premise regarding the meaning of "secret" in the town council rules, the Supreme Court's Second Petty Bench has in effect ratified an unjust Tokyo High Court ruling which avoided making a judgment on whether Mr. Tsuchiya's comments at plenary sessions and other occasions constituted "disclosure of the proceedings of a secret meeting" (in other words, whether the contents of the article in "Yugawara Council" were true or not).Tsuchiya's legal team finds this decision in no way acceptable.

However, the lawsuit against the Yugawara town council members for unjust punishment has come to an end with this Supreme Court decision.

Thank you very much for your support.

We will report further on the information disclosure lawsuit at a later date.

We published the decision of the case feburary 1st 2023, but because today the defendant requested publication restriction of the decision to the court, we have to delete the data of the decision. We might re-publish the decision depending on the court decision.

To everyone who supports the lawsuits against the rampant “minority member crushing” in local assemblies

Legal team's opinion on the act of "photographing the Manazuru town electoral list" by plaintiff Yukiko Tsuchiya

Thank you very much for your support in this Wrongful Discipline Revocation Lawsuit and the Ombudsman's Freedom of Information Lawsuit.

At the end of August, there were many reports that severely criticized Mr. Tsuchiya for photographing the electoral list of Manazuru Town last September and sharing it with the Manazuru Town Council (at that time). Some say that Mr. Tsuchiya, who leaked the list of electors, is not qualified to criticize the leak of the list of delinquent taxpayers.

According to Mr. Tsuchiya, in order to support Mr. Isamu Kimura's election last September, he applied for access to the electoral list and made a copy of it using his own computer. It is true that he took the time and effort to take pictures with his own tablet device, and that he mailed Mr. Isamu Kimura's election postcard to the address where the photos were converted into data.

In Manazuru Town, there was a precedent incident in which the mayor took out the name list, and there is a tendency to be widely reported as a related incident. I don't think it's something that can be done. Here's why.

The Public Offices Election Law does not stipulate that persons with access rights to the electoral list are prohibited from making copies, including photography, or from using computers. In the first place, regarding the electoral list, the old law stipulated that "the electoral list or an extract thereof shall be made available for inspection, and other appropriate facilities shall be provided" (former Article 28, Paragraph 2). A considerable proportion of local governments allow copies of electoral lists. However, in 2006, the second part was deleted, and it became ``You must make an extract of the electoral list available'' (current Article 28-2, paragraph 1). In the background of this revision, while there were doubts about the provision of convenience from the viewpoint of personal information, there was also a request from political parties that it was inconvenient to transfer the list of browsed lists, so it should be determined according to the actual situation of each region. It is said that

Legally speaking, the fact that the obligatory provisions for provision of convenience have been abolished only means that the act has become voluntary, and should not be construed as prohibiting the act. There is none.

Copying of the electoral list is not the right of the person who has the right to view the electoral list, but it is a matter of discretion of the local election administration committee. If the guidelines, etc. stipulate the prohibition of filming or filming, then Mr. Tsuchiya's act falls under violation of the guidelines, and if it is not specified, it must be. And in Manazuru Town, Mr. Tsuchiya confirmed later that these provisions are in the guidelines.

However, freedom of political activity is a right guaranteed by the constitution, and while it is required to promote the activities of candidates and political parties, the town is unconditionally allowed to take pictures of the list and copy it using a computer. There is also the possibility that banning this could amount to an abuse of discretionary power, and there are even doubts as to whether Mr. Tsuchiya's actions should be considered substantially illegal. consider it minor.

On the other hand, the "list problem" that Mr. Tsuchiya is pursuing is an unprecedented case in which the personal information of the town's tax delinquents (approximately 2,000 cases) was distributed to all members of the town council, but was not collected. In the first place, providing the list for inspection is illegal and prohibited with penalties, which is an extremely serious act.

As mentioned above, even if it is the same "roster" problem, it is clear that the weight is completely different.

These “resistors,” such as minority members of Congress, whom we have supported through various incidents in the past, have been attacked by various accusations that make their claims trivial. I've seen a lot of "resistors" who have broken hearts because of that.

We need your warm support now. It leads to not trivializing the delinquent list problem.

We, the defense team, have renewed our determination to continue supporting Mr. Tsuchiya through this trial.

that's all

The defendant submitted Brief 4, Evidence Otsu 29-33. Exhibit Otsu 33 is ordered to submit documents from the court.

The original minutes of the plenary session of the Yugawara Town Council on September 7, 2nd year of Reiwa (plaintiff) submitted based on the decree.

The remarks in the general question of are not hidden).

The plaintiff has submitted Brief 6, Evidence A 81-91. Ko 91 is the plaintiff Yukiko Tsuchiya town council

It is a statement of.

The next date will be held at Yokohama District Court No. 502 from 2:00 pm on October 5th. Plaintiff Yuki Tsuchiya

A cross-examination of the child town council will be held.

February 16, 2022 Information Disclosure Proceedings

Defendant (Yugawara Town) appealed against the 1st trial decision. It is an appeal to the effect that the part that the parliamentary rules are not included in the "laws, etc." stated in the dictum of the judgment should be changed.

April 20, 2022 Town council member disciplinary action cancellation lawsuit (plaintiff Yukiko Tsuchiya town council) Document submission order

In this case, the plaintiff asked the town to submit the minutes of the identification case meeting in order to clarify the content of the plaintiff's regular meeting in the town council that was the basis of the punishment, but the town refused and the court refused. It was left to the decision of. On the same day, a document submission order was issued, recognizing the need to examine the minutes as the most objective evidence to identify the statement.

February 2, 2022 Information Disclosure Proceedings (Plaintiff Yugawara Citizens Ombudsman) Decision

It was decided that the private decision made by the town would be canceled as an illegal one that simply stated the ordinance as the reason and did not meet the conditions for presenting the reason (however, the public decision was decided). In addition, as a dictum (a part not related to the judgment), the wording of non-public information stipulated in "laws, etc." in this ordinance refers to laws and ordinances, and parliamentary rules are included in it. He said he couldn't (= he couldn't make a private decision based on the parliamentary rules).

February 2, 2022 Town council member disciplinary action cancellation request case (plaintiff Yukiko Tsuchiya town council) 6th date Yokohama District Court 1st Civil Department

Plaintiff submits brief 5 and evidence A75-80. Eventually, it was a conference call. It will take a couple of months for the court to issue a decision to submit a document, so I will wait for it.

December 22, 2021 Town council member disciplinary action cancellation request case (plaintiff Yukiko Tsuchiya town council) 4th date Yokohama District Court 1st Civil Department

Defendant submits Preparatory Document 3, Evidence Otsu 23-28 on December 14th

Plaintiff submits brief 4, Evidence A 70-74-2 on December 20

In addition, the plaintiff submitted documents and evidence regarding the document submission order and offered to cross-examine the plaintiff Tsuchiya (the plaintiff applied for cross-examination will be the deputy mayor and Tsuchiya).

Defendant: The plaintiff will argue speedily, so I would like you to set a deadline just to discuss the progress as to who you will not be able to respond to and who you will be cross-examined.

Plaintiff: There is no need to set up such a thing separately (it will not be possible to hear on that date). After a year, he also proved his claim. I want you to issue a document submission order as soon as possible.

Defendant: (About the plaintiff's attempt to cross-examine Mr. Tsuchiya and the deputy mayor) I'm not sure if he will say that only the plaintiff knows, or what kind of proof he will do, so I'd like a deadline to discuss the progress. The allegations regarding the document submission order are over.

Court: I need some time because I will discuss (consult with three judges). About 5 minutes have passed since all the judges left

Court: Next time, we will discuss the argument date (normal date), and the purpose is to discuss the progress.

Next time is 15:00 on February 2nd (Wednesday). Since there is a judgment of the information disclosure lawsuit on this day, a report meeting will be held together with the judgment as soon as this date is over. Please come and join us.