Japan's Justice in the Dark

Please support so that Japan will be governed under the law, fundamental human rights will be protected, and it will become a country complying with international law

Nagano Opinion To Boris Johnson British Prime Minister 2019-10-14: Dear Sir,However, a request for “retrial A request for retrial” is not allowed because of an error in the “applicable law”.

To Boris Johnson British Prime Minister


2019-10-14: Dear Sir,
Many people understand this incident. It is an error in "applicable law". Many advise “A request for retrial”. However, a request for “retrial A request for retrial” is not allowed because of an error in the “applicable law”. See Article 435, Paragraphs 3 and 7 of the Criminal Procedure Code. So I am suing the person involved in the case. "Sin name" is "Crimes of False Complaints" and "abuse of authority by special public officer"


Part 1. Japanese is omitted. Please check the following website.
Article 435 A request for a retrial may be filed against a final and binding judgment of guilt,
when filed in the interests of the person who has been found guilty, and when:

(i) It has been proven through a final and binding judgment that documentary
or material evidence which served as evidence
in the original judgment is false or has been altered;

(ii) It has been proven through a final and binding judgment that testimony,
expert evaluation, interpretation, or translation which served as evidence
in the original judgment was false;

(iii) It has been proven through a final and binding judgment that a person
who has been found guilty was falsely accused; provided, however, that this shall only be when such person was found guilty on the basis of such false accusation;
(iv)

(iv) A decision which served as evidence in the original judgment has been altered
by final and binding judgment;

(v) With regard to cases where a person has been found guilty
of criminal infringement of a patent right, utility model right, design right,
or trademark right, a trial decision that voided such right has become final,
or a judgment that voided such right has been rendered;

(vi) Clear evidence which should make the court render an acquittal or a dismissal,
for judicial bar to the person who has been sentenced,
or make the court render a remission of punishment
for the person to whom punishment has been rendered
or make the court find a lesser crime than the crime
which was found in the original judgment; or,

(vii) It has been proven through a final and binding judgment that a judge
who participated in the original judgment, a judge who participated
in making documentary evidence which served as evidence in the original judgment,
or the public prosecutor, public prosecutor's assistant officer,
or judicial police officer who compiled a document or gave a statement
which served as evidence in the original judgment,
committed a crime with regard to his / her duty in the case; provided,
however, that this shall be limited to when prosecution against such judge ,
public prosecutor, public prosecutor's assistant officer,
or judicial police officer was instituted before rendition of the original judgment,
and when the original court did not know such fact.

The following explains the false name of the content.
I have explained many times.
The “reason for crime” in the indictment is the content
of the Immigration Act Article 22-4-4.
See “Indictment”.
"Indictment" is the following description.
1) The fact that the “regular offender” violated Article 70 “Unqualified Labor”
of the Immigration Control Act.
2) The fact that “Defendant” provided “Contract of Employment
with False Contents” to “Criminal”.
3) The fact that the “right offender” filed an application for “residence status”
with the attachment of a “false employment contract”. (There is no description,
but since you have obtained the status of residence, it will be act 1) above.
“Defendant” is the person who “provided a false employment contract” to the “criminal”.

When a “criminal” is attached with a “false employment contract”,
he / she will be listed in Article 22-4-4 of the Immigration Law.
The Minister of Justice performs the following “Administrative Disposition”.
It is not (criminal punishment).
1) Cancel your status of residence.
2) Order to leave the country.
They punished those who were not guilty in Articles 60
and 62 of the Criminal Code “Sinners to Support Other Crimes”.

Therefore, the “doing” of the parties concerned falls under Article 172
of the Criminal Code “Crimes of False Complaints”
and Article 194 of the Penal Code “abuse of authority by special public officer”.
If you are guilty, you are eligible for a “request for retrial”.

It will continue tomorrow.

Please see "Bill of indictment" at the following "Site".
In this case, just by looking at this “bill of indictment”,
you can understand the “error of applicable law”.

Please see “English translation” and “Japanese text” PDFs.
Please be careful when handling personal information.
● Translation of English sentence “letter of indictment”
"Indictment against Yasuhiro Nagano KinGungaku"
English translation is for reference only. To be precise, do it yourself.
http://www.miraico.jp/crime/g5-Indictment-against-Nagano-Kin.pdf
● Original Japanese text “letter of indictment”
"Indictment against Yasuhiro Nagano KinGungaku (Japanese)"
English translation is incorrect. Please see “PDF” above for English translation.
http://www.miraico.jp/ICC-crime/2Related%20Documents/%EF%BC%91Indictment.pdf
● Please see related laws. (Japanese and English translation)
1) Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act
Immigration Control and Refugee Recognition Act
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=3039&vm=&re=
2) Criminal law
Penal code
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=3130&vm=&re=
3) Constitution of Japan
The Constitution of Japan
http://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/law/detail/?id=174


Part 2. I “sue” two things.
This is an “international” “human rights violation” by the Japanese government.
It has been nearly 10 years since the incident. My life is limited.
We ask for your support so that our “honor recovery and compensation” will be carried out.
If the world ignores “governance under the law”,
it is natural to resolve it by terrorism. But crazy.

1. Foreigners performed “illegal labor” other than “qualification of residence”.
But foreigners are innocent.
Only foreigners were punished for the immigration law article 70 “Illegal Labor Crimes”.
On the other hand, the Immigration Control Law punishes employers
who are “causal” of illegal labor under Article 73-2
of the Immigration Control Law (crimes that promote illegal employment).

However, the Japanese judiciary “punished” foreigners only, but not “employers”.
This is clearly contrary to the principle of equality under the law
And it violates international law that prohibits "arbitrarily" "punishing" only foreigners.

If an employer who hires a foreigner illegally is "innocent",
an illegally employed foreigner is also "innocent".
If so, there is no “person who supported other crimes of the Penal Code”
against Article 70 of the Immigration Control Act.
"I, KinGungaku, Philippine diplomat, Philippine embassy official" is innocent.

2. The prosecution is “applying” the “crimes to support other crimes”
in Articles 60 and 62 of the Penal Code against Article 70
of the Immigration Control Act on the grounds
of “support of the Immigration Act 22-4-4” It ’s crazy.
This is out of logic in the law.

A foreigner acted as prescribed in Article 22-4-4
(Acquisition of status of residence by submitting false documents).
However, there is no “criminal punishment” for this.
Disposal is “cancellation of status of residence”
and “forced relocation” by the Minister of Justice.
Therefore, the “crime to support other crimes”
in Articles 60 and 62 of the Penal Code is not applicable.
The “reason for crime” in Article 22-4-4 of the Immigration Act pointed out
by the “indictment” has no causal relationship with Article 70 of the Immigration Act.
The logic of the law is completely crazy.

The Japanese government has "crush" "sue".
However, “crush” by state power is “stop” of “Statute of limitations”.

The materials are below.
http://www.miraico.jp/Bridgetohumanrights/

There are many victims in the world.

Best regards. Yasuhiro Nagano

Yasuhiro Nagano

PS:
There are many American victims. I have seen this with my eyes.
If the prosecution does not arrest the employer, the Americans are not guilty.
The United States government should claim restoration and compensation
for the honor of Americans.
please support the "Appeal" to the "ICC."