Prosecutors coerced suspects into making confessions that matched the scenario prosecutors had created for a crime.
Despite their repeated denials of any wrongdoing, the prosecutors obviously indicted suspects without paying due attention to the evidence. In a postal fraud case, the prosecution's investigation was indeed highhanded.
The Osaka District Court on Friday found Atsuko Muraki, a former bureau chief of the welfare ministry, not guilty. She had been accused of conspiring with other ministry officials to forge and issue an official document that certifies an organization's eligibility for special postal discounts provided to groups supporting disabled people.
Muraki had consistently denied the allegations from the start, when she was arrested by the special investigative squad of the Osaka District Public Prosecutors Office.
The court rejected almost all of the arguments by prosecutors.
"The court cannot recognize any facts that prove that the defendant created a forged document," the ruling said.
The prosecutors should review their sloppy investigation. And they should not appeal the ruling, which would hinder Muraki from returning to her job at the ministry.
The falsified certification was issued to Rin-no-kai, which lacked any real substance as an organization that supports people with disabilities.
At the time, Muraki was a section chief of the welfare division for disabled people, and the certification was stamped with the section chief's official seal. Prosecutors accused Muraki of instructing Tsutomu Kamimura, her subordinate, to fabricate the document.
Kamimura admitted to those charges during questioning, but he denied he received such an order from Muraki during the trial.
During the prosecution's interrogation, Muraki stressed that the forgery was Kamimura's idea, but the prosecutors would not listen.
Ministry officials who took the stand during the trial as witnesses also said they had been subjected to aggressive, coercive interrogation methods by the prosecutors.
The Osaka District Court rejected as evidence the depositions by Kamimura and others, saying they were untrustworthy. The prosecution had lost a main pillar of its case.
The scenario that prosecutors had drawn up was that the Rin-no-kai leader asked a lawmaker of the Democratic Party of Japan to use his influence in the welfare ministry, leading to favorable treatment for the group.
However, during the trial, it was revealed that the DPJ lawmaker had been golfing on the day he was supposedly approached by the Rin-no-kai leader at the Diet members' building. The prosecution had failed to corroborate something so basic.
There has been a long history of criticism against prosecutors' investigative methods. In 1993, a prosecutor of the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office was indicted on charges of assaulting a witness in a corruption case involving a general contractor.
In other cases, defendants have testified in court that they had been "forced to make depositions against their will" during questioning by the special investigative squads.
Prosecuting authorities must accept that public trust in the special squads is waning.
The special investigative squads had exposed the dark underbelly of the long rule by the Liberal Democratic Party in cases like the Lockheed bribery scandal and the Recruit stocks-for-favor scandal.
Although regime changes have become a reality, the role of prosecutors remains the same--keeping a sharp eye on the corruption of power.
The history of false accusations has been marked by an excessive emphasis on confessions--and forced confessions. The latest case may well be the latest chapter in this history.
Prosecuting authorities must regard this situation as a crisis. They should set up an independent committee that includes lawyers and academic experts to review this case and take preventive measures, such as videotaping interrogations.
At the same time, the media should contemplate more objective and rational ways of reporting.
--The Asahi Shimbun, Sept. 11