logo
Court orders pay in info-disclosure lawsuit over Abenomasks

Court orders pay in info-disclosure lawsuit over Abenomasks

Asahi Shimbun2 days ago

Plaintiff Hiroshi Kamiwaki, middle, holds a sign claiming victory in a lawsuit against the government at the Osaka District Court on June 5. (Minami Endo)
OSAKA—The Osaka District Court on June 5 overturned the majority of the government's decisions on refusing to disclose information concerning its 40-billion-yen ($280 million) 'Abenomask' project.
The ruling ordered the government to pay 110,000 yen ($767) in compensation to a constitutional scholar who has been denied information on how the millions of anti-COVID-19 masks were obtained.
The government had argued that it discarded procurement information about the mask-distribution project, which was initiated in April 2020 when Shinzo Abe was prime minister.
However, the court ruled, 'It is hard to believe that there were no documents even taking into account the busy schedule at the time.'
The Abe government delivered cloth masks to every household to help prevent the spread of COVID-19.
The masks, which became known as Abenomasks, were criticized as too small, defective or dirty, and the project was ridiculed. But then the cost of the project emerged, as well as the waste.
The government procured about 300 million cloth masks. However, about 83 million of them ended up stored as inventory.
Hiroshi Kamiwaki, a constitutional law professor at Kobe Gakuin University, had demanded information disclosure about the project several times since April 2020.
He argued the government 'has an obligation to explain the process to the public because of the huge amount of taxpayer money spent on the contract.'
Specifically, he sought details on how the masks were procured as well as the contracting process with the vendors.
Although the government provided documents on contract figures and quotations, it said that emails and interview records showing negotiations with the contractors were 'nonexistent.'
Kamiwaki filed the lawsuit in February 2021, but the government continued to insist that the emails 'were destroyed each time.'
The plaintiff's side then obtained emails from the contractors that indicated they had meetings with government employees about the masks.
When the government re-examined the case, it 'found' more than 100 e-mails on the computers of two employees.
However, the government refused to disclose these emails, and the two employees testified in court that their communication with the contractors was mostly 'verbal.'
Therefore, the issue in the lawsuit became whether the employees' emails were subject to information disclosure laws and whether the government's claims that there were no records of such meetings were credible.
The plaintiff argued the emails were related to the government's decision-making process, and that the administrative document management rules do not allow for 'destruction each time.'
The plaintiff's side also argued it would be impossible for the government not to keep written records of the contracting process with the vendors.
The government countered that the emails were documents with a 'retention period of less than one year' that could be disposed of without any problem. Thus, the government said, the emails were not subject to information disclosure laws.
The government also argued it is obligated to produce documents only 'when it affects policymaking or project implementation policies.'
The absence of meetings' records is not unnatural, it said, and requested that the compensation request be dismissed.
After the ruling, the health ministry said, 'We would like to take appropriate action after fully examining the content of the court decision and consulting with the relevant ministries and agencies.'

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Japan adopts ¥20 trillion anti-disaster program
Japan adopts ¥20 trillion anti-disaster program

Japan Times

time21 hours ago

  • Japan Times

Japan adopts ¥20 trillion anti-disaster program

The Cabinet of Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba gave the green light on Friday to the government's new five-year anti-disaster program worth over ¥20 trillion, about ¥5 trillion larger than the current one. The fiscal 2026-2030 program, starting next April, focuses on rebuilding aging infrastructure and stepping up preparations for huge disasters, such as ones that would be caused by massive earthquakes expected to occur along the Nankai Trough, which stretches off the Pacific coast of central to southwestern Japan, or directly beneath the Tokyo metropolitan area. At a National Resilience Promotion Headquarters gathering held prior to the Cabinet meeting, Ishiba, head of the task force, said that "all relevant government agencies should get united to strongly drive forward efforts" to finish preparing necessary equipment and evacuation facilities as soon as possible. Under the new program, funds worth around ¥10.6 trillion would be poured into seismic reinforcement work for aging water and sewerage systems as well as roads, ¥5.8 trillion into measures against river flooding, and ¥1.8 trillion into boosting regional efforts for disaster prevention and reduction, including improving living conditions and food availability at evacuation centers. In particular, the government intends to beef up anti-disaster measures on peninsulas, where afflicted areas are prone to isolation, and "strategically" maintain and manage the water and sewerage systems, taking lessons from the 2024 Noto Peninsula earthquake and the fatal road cave-in caused by a ruptured sewerage pipe in Saitama Prefecture earlier this year.

VOX POPULI: Government never faced up to lack of records on ‘Abenomasks'
VOX POPULI: Government never faced up to lack of records on ‘Abenomasks'

Asahi Shimbun

timea day ago

  • Asahi Shimbun

VOX POPULI: Government never faced up to lack of records on ‘Abenomasks'

Plaintiff Hiroshi Kamiwaki, middle, holds a sign proclaiming victory in a lawsuit against the government at the Osaka District Court on June 5. (Minami Endo) There's a Japanese expression, 'shokushogimi'—the sense of being fed up after overindulgence. By now, many in Japan are surely fed up with hearing about the 'Abenomask,' the government's much-maligned initiative under then Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to distribute reusable cloth face masks to every household during the COVID-19 pandemic. Despite the enormous outlay of taxpayer funds, the masks failed to reach people when they were most needed, and vast quantities ended up in storage. Rarely has a government policy drawn such widespread ridicule and criticism. So how were these masks procured in the first place? On June 5, the Osaka District Court overturned the government's decision to withhold documents related to the contracting process. The court dismissed the government's assertion that 'no documents exist' as implausible. The government claimed that most interactions had been conducted 'orally,' without written records. That means contracts totaling 40 billion yen ($278 million) for 300 million masks—each differing by vendor—were arranged through verbal agreements alone. The notion strains credulity. Even if true, such an approach reveals a staggering level of administrative negligence. We saw a similar attitude among senior bureaucrats during the Moritomo Gakuen scandal, which involved the questionable sale of state-owned land to a private school operator with ties to Abe. Officials brazenly claimed that documents related to the land deal had been discarded and that virtually nothing was known. Such an outrageous excuse is so appalling that it leaves one speechless. It inevitably casts serious doubt on the credibility of those involved. In the case of the mask contracts, even emails that had supposedly been discarded were later unearthed during reinvestigation. As Ryunosuke Akutagawa (1892–1927), one of Japan's most influential writers, once observed with remarkable insight and precision, 'There are truths that can only be expressed through lies.' 'There was absolutely nothing wrong with it,' Abe maintained, defending the controversial policy and continuing to don the cloth masks. But the success or failure of a public policy is not determined by the policymaker—it is judged by the people. What, then, are the lessons to be drawn from the pandemic? If access to legitimate information is obstructed, it becomes impossible to scrutinize the historical responsibility of those who shaped critical decisions. Not long ago, I learned that a friend still had an Abenomask at home. Feeling a twinge of nostalgia, I asked to see it. The small mask, made of thick, coarse gauze, felt oddly familiar. When I held it to my face, it gave off a faint scent—reminiscent of 'warabanshi,' the rough, low-grade paper once commonly used in Japanese schools for handouts and practice sheets. —The Asahi Shimbun, June 6 * * * Vox Populi, Vox Dei is a popular daily column that takes up a wide range of topics, including culture, arts and social trends and developments. Written by veteran Asahi Shimbun writers, the column provides useful perspectives on and insights into contemporary Japan and its culture.

Trump ban on entry of international Harvard students temporarily blocked by judge
Trump ban on entry of international Harvard students temporarily blocked by judge

Japan Today

timea day ago

  • Japan Today

Trump ban on entry of international Harvard students temporarily blocked by judge

FILE PHOTO: People walk to attend the 374th Commencement exercises at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S., May 29, 2025. REUTERS/Brian Snyder/File Photo By Nate Raymond, Steve Gorman and Daniel Wiessner A federal judge in Boston on Thursday temporarily blocked U.S. President Donald Trump from barring U.S. entry of foreign nationals seeking to study or participate in exchange programs at Harvard University. Under a two-page temporary restraining order granted to Harvard, U.S. District Judge Allison Burroughs enjoined Trump's proclamation from taking effect pending further litigation of the matter amid an escalating dispute between the Ivy League school and Republican president. The judge ruled that Trump's directive prohibiting foreign nationals from entering the United States to study at Harvard for the next six months would cause "immediate and irreparable injury" before the courts have a chance to review the case. Burroughs last month had blocked Trump from implementing a separate order prohibiting Harvard from enrolling international students, who make up more than a quarter of its student body. Harvard on Thursday amended its lawsuit to challenge the new directive, claiming Trump is violating Burroughs' decision. "The Proclamation denies thousands of Harvard's students the right to come to this country to pursue their education and follow their dreams, and it denies Harvard the right to teach them. Without its international students, Harvard is not Harvard," the school said in the filing. Burroughs' order on Thursday also continued a separate temporary restraining order she issued on May 23 against the administration's restriction on international student enrollment at Harvard. Earlier on Thursday, White House spokesperson Abigail Jackson called Harvard "a hotbed of anti-American, anti-Semitic, pro-terrorist agitators," claims that the school has previously denied. "Harvard's behavior has jeopardized the integrity of the entire U.S. student and exchange visitor visa system and risks compromising national security. Now it must face the consequences of its actions," Jackson said in a statement. Trump cited national security concerns as justification for barring international students from entering the U.S. to pursue studies at the Cambridge, Massachusetts-based university. Under Trump's proclamation, the suspension would initially be for six months but could be extended. Trump's order also directed the U.S. State Department to consider revoking academic or exchange visas of any current Harvard students who meet his proclamation's criteria. In Thursday's court filing, Harvard said Trump had violated federal law by failing to back up his claims about national security. "The Proclamation does not deem the entry of an alien or class of aliens to be detrimental to the interests of the United States, because noncitizens who are impacted by the Proclamation can enter the United States — just so long as they go somewhere other than Harvard," the school said. The Trump administration has launched a multifront attack on the nation's oldest and wealthiest university, freezing billions of dollars in grants and other funding and proposing to end its tax-exempt status, prompting a series of legal challenges. Harvard argues the administration is retaliating against it for refusing to accede to demands to control the school's governance, curriculum and the ideology of its faculty and students. The university sued after Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem announced on May 22 that her department was immediately revoking Harvard's Student and Exchange Visitor Program certification, which allows it to enroll foreign students. Noem's action was temporarily blocked almost immediately by Burroughs. On the eve of a hearing before her last week, the department changed course and said it would instead challenge Harvard's certification through a lengthier administrative process. Nonetheless, Burroughs said she planned to issue a longer-term preliminary injunction at Harvard's urging, saying one was necessary to give some protection to Harvard's international students. Wednesday's two-page directive from Trump said Harvard had "demonstrated a history of concerning foreign ties and radicalism," and had "extensive entanglements with foreign adversaries," including China. It said Harvard had seen a "drastic rise in crime in recent years while failing to discipline at least some categories of conduct violations on campus," and had failed to provide sufficient information to the Homeland Security Department about foreign students' "known illegal or dangerous activities." The school in Thursday's court filing said those claims were unsubstantiated. © Thomson Reuters 2025.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store