EDITORIAL: Reopening Ozawa case

An independent judicial panel of citizens on Thursday objected to prosecutors' decision not to indict former Democratic Party of Japan Secretary-General Ichiro Ozawa over the alleged falsification of his 2007 political fund report.

Stressing there are good reasons to suspect that Ozawa conspired with his aides to make false statements in the report submitted to authorities, the No. 1 Committee for the Inquest of Prosecution called on prosecutors to reopen the investigation into the ruling party heavyweight.

The panel's decision is indeed a heavy blow to both Ozawa and the prosecutors who decided to drop the case against him.

Unlike a decision that directly says Ozawa should be indicted, however, the Thursday ruling won't lead to automatic indictment.

If prosecutors again decide not to indict Ozawa after a fresh inquiry, the case will be closed.

A different prosecution inquest committee decided that Ozawa should be indicted over the alleged falsification of his political fund reports for 2004 and 2005.

Both panels expressed doubts about the credibility of the explanations by Ozawa and his aides concerning a dubious land deal. But there are subtle differences in the two panels' conclusions.

Some people may feel uncomfortable with these differences. But evaluations of evidence and conclusions based on such evaluations inevitably differ depending on the viewpoints of the people involved. There is no right answer.

Even prosecutors were divided over whether to indict Ozawa when the investigation was under way.

That's why we argued against making any prejudgments when the No. 5 Committee for the Inquest of Prosecution ruled in late April that Ozawa should be indicted.

We should remain cool-headed in watching how the situation, which could lead to forced indictment of Ozawa over the reports for 2004 and 2005, actually unfolds.

The Ozawa case has also provoked criticism by some legal experts and journalists against the inquest panel system.

Critics say citizens on these committees lack the ability to appropriately examine and assess evidence.

They also claim the citizens are susceptible to social trends and public opinions, and it is dangerous to give them great power.

Clearly, this is just criticism for the sake of criticism.

The panel's decision Thursday shows clear signs that the members carefully studied the evidence and used sound common sense and judgment while receiving help from a lawyer.

The panel also made specific proposals for revisions to the Political Fund Control Law.

Participation of the people, with whom sovereignty rests, reinforces the foundation of the judiciary and promotes democracy.

The panel's decision has reaffirmed this argument.

A review of the details of the system is necessary for improvements. But we cannot support any argument that underestimates and regards citizens' judgment as perilous.

Although the decision does not lead to forced indictment, Ozawa cannot escape his political responsibility for the scandal.

Ozawa continues to wield enormous influence in the political world. The panel has raised serious doubts about the handling of his political funds, which are closely linked to his political power.

A series of political fund scandals has dampened public expectations for the DPJ and contributed to the party's drubbing in the recent Upper House election.

Ozawa should make a sincere response to the panel's conclusion by being honest with the public and offering a convincing explanation in the Diet.

The development will also test the stance of the DPJ leadership toward this issue. Simply pledging to shape up without taking any concrete action would not brighten the political outlook for the ruling party.

--The Asahi Shimbun, July 16