袴田巌さん国家賠償請求訴訟 ―半世紀のえん罪、国の責任を問う State Liability for the Half-century Wrongful Conviction on Death Row - State Compensation Lawsuits of Iwao Hakamada
2024年9月26日、袴田巖さんは逮捕から58年という長い闘いの末、再審無罪となりました。
しかし、死刑の恐怖にさらされ、47年7か月に及んだ拘束は巖さんの心を蝕み、現在も重い拘禁反応は続いています。
今回、弁護団はえん罪、そして名誉棄損と2件の国家賠償請求訴訟を提訴しています。取り返しのつかない形で人生を奪うえん罪を二度と起こさないためにも、捜査や国家機関の在り方の見直しを求めます。
On September 26, 2024, Iwao Hakamada was acquitted in a retrial after a long 58-year battle. However, the fear of the death penalty and 47 years and 7 months of detention took a toll on his mind, and he continues to suffer from severe detention-related stress. His legal team has filed two lawsuits seeking state compensation: one for wrongful conviction and another for defamation. By scrutinizing the rules and practices of investigation and institutions, these lawsuits also help make sure that such irreparable harms on life and dignity would not be repeated.
名誉毀損第1回口頭弁論
Defamation Case, First Oral Argument
2026/3/28 10:17
・原告訴状等陳述、書証提出
・被告答弁書陳述、書証提出
・原告求釈明の処理、主張整理
被告は、最高裁平成9年9月9日判決の枠組みは前提としつつも、談話の内容は事実の摘示といえないという主張であることを確認した。
原告は、上記判決の枠組みをふまえ、次回までに、一般の読者の普通の注意と読み方を基準に、黙示の事実の摘示があったといえる判断過程を明らかにする主張を補充する。
裁判所は、被告答弁書のうち、審理、立証の過程をくだくだと論じている部分については、一般の読者の普通の注意と読み方という前提からは、重要性が高いと考えてないという認識を示した。
・Statement of plaintiff's complaint, etc., submission of documentary evidence
- Defendant's statement of defense, submission of documentary evidence
- Processing of the plaintiff's request for clarification and organization of arguments
The defendant acknowledged that, while acknowledging the framework of the Supreme Court judgment of September 9, 1997, their argument was that the content of the statements could not be considered a statement of fact.
Based on the framework of the above judgment, the plaintiff will supplement their arguments by the next hearing by clarifying the process by which they determined that there was an implied factual disclosure, based on the ordinary attention and reading of an average reader.
The court indicated that, regarding the parts of the defendant's answer that elaborate on the trial and evidence-gathering process, it did not consider them to be of high importance from the perspective of "the ordinary attention and reading of the average reader."
1 件中 1-1 件
1-1 of 1 cases
- 1