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.

October 25, 2021 Case of request for cancellation of disciplinary action for town council members (plaintiff Yukiko Tsuchiya town council) 4th date Yokohama District Court 1st Civil Affairs Department

What was submitted in this court Plaintiff: Brief 3 & Evidence (Exhibit Ko No. 54-69) submitted, application for witness of Mr. Rouki, former deputy mayor Defendant: Correction of defendant's opinion on document submission order Contents of brief 3 from plaintiff Explanation of the main points in court. There are four points I would like to emphasize in particular. ・ The apology order is not a sanctuary where the parliament decides freely and does not have to ask the court's decision. In the case where the apology order was issued for the reason of Was not admitted, and the discretionary deviation was admitted and canceled. In view of this case, the court should decide on the apology in this case as well.

・ It is illegal to distribute the list of delinquents to members of the Diet The reason for the town's claim that distribution of the list is not a problem is that the town council is granted the right to inspect Article 98 of the Local Autonomy Law. However, only 0.1% of the special committees nationwide are granted this inspection right. When I requested the prefecture to disclose information, the reply from Yugawara Town was that this inspection had never been done. If so, it is clear that the submission of the list to the parliament is a violation of the Personal Information Protection Ordinance / Local Tax Law, and the plaintiff's point out that fact is a legitimate act (= illegality) to stop the violation. No).

・ The suspension of attendance by Representative Tsuchiya had a significant impact on the activities of members of the Diet. I was informed of the debate. The case judged by the Governor of Gunma states that even if the parliament takes 28 minutes, it cannot be said that there is no deviation.

-It is natural that the public relations activities of the parliament will be liable for defamation on the next date, and the defendant will refute these plaintiffs' allegations. The plaintiff has alleged that the minutes of the secret meeting should clarify the part on which the punishment is based in the document submission order, but the defendant has argued that it is not necessary to issue it, and the plaintiff again argues against this. It was decided to do.

The next due date is from 10:00 on December 22nd.

Yokohama District Court 1st Civil Affairs Department Reiwa 3rd year (Gyo C) No. 7 Defendant submitted briefs 1 and 2 and Exhibit Otsu No. 10-22. In response, the plaintiff will argue next time. In the proceedings, the plaintiff needs to specify which part of the plaintiff's remarks in the parliament, SNS, etc. corresponds to the "outside of the secret meeting proceedings" that the defendant punished, the part of the general question by the plaintiff of the secret meeting. The defendant requested a document submission order, but the defendant refused because the plaintiff once approved the deletion and the part had disappeared. However, this would have no basis for punishment, so the plaintiff argued that it was inappropriate and asked for a court decision. (Such an exchange took place in court)