村野瀬玲奈の秘書課広報室

　　

特定秘密保護法についての一連の記事（メモ）、『カテゴリ : 「特定秘密保護法」、「不特定秘密隠ぺい法」、 「民主主義廃止法」、「国民弾圧自由化法」、「暗黒裁判推進法」、「国会議員無力化法」、 「官僚主権国家保護法」』を続けます。デモ参加、国会議員や報道機関、新聞社、テレビ局へのメッセージ伝達など、誰にでもできることはあります。前回の記事、『「特定秘密保護法案」との闘い。国際社会からの懸念を日本政界に伝えること。参院で保守系政党からの反対票を掘り起こすこと。　（国民から「国民主権」を奪う「秘密保全法」　（メモ） (149)）』の通り、状況は切羽詰まっていますが、最後までできることを続けましょう。

下記情報をいただきました。 全参議院議員２４２名の電話ファックス、電話番号一覧つきです。拡散お願いします。 http://t.co/GzXqCpA0L8 ブログ創価学会初代会長は治安維持法で獄死　公明党にとっても法案可決は得策でない。議員に働きかけを！

— モン＝モジモジ (@mojimoji_x) December 1, 2013

特定秘密保護法に批判的なのは日本の反対者だけではなく、海外にもいることを実感するために、そして、そこから勇気を得るために、今回も、海外の報道をお持ち帰りで読みます。（手抜きですがお許しください。）

●フランスねこのNews Watching
米国との軍事協力に向け、国民の知る権利を制限しようとする日本政府／ルモンド紙（11月28日）
http://franceneko.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2013/12/1128-32a6.html
2013年12月 2日 (月)

原発問題にとどまらないトピックですが、重要記事として掲載します。

。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。。

日本政府は国民の知る権利を犠牲にしながら軍事防衛体制を強化しつつある。
11月26日に衆議院を通過し参議院での討議を待つ特定秘密保護法案は、防衛、外交、スパイ対策、テロリスト対策の各分野に関連し政府が「機微に触れる」と判断する全ての情報を秘密にすることを認めるものだ。この法案は、機密情報のやりとりに関連する米国政府からの要求に応えるために制定されるものである。

「この法律は、国民を守るために作られました。」

安倍晋三首相はこのように主張する。しかし安倍首相は他方で、「国家秘密」の定義を全く示していない。この法案は先に設置された国家安全保障会議（NSC）と並び、総理大臣の権力を強化する一方で、国民が必要な情報に自由にアクセスする権利を制限するものだ。

国連で「表現の自由」を担当する人権問題報告者フランク・ラ・ルー氏は特定秘密保護法案に関し、「内部告発者や報道関係者の発言を著しく脅かす脅威に溢れた危険な法案です」と懸念を表明した。

日本人の大多数がこの法案の制定に反対している。

（抜粋、一部編集）

●元の記事：「国民の知る権利を制限する法律を採決する日本政府」／ルモンド紙（11月28日）
(« Le Japon vote une loi qui limite la liberté d'informer », LE MONDE, 28.11.2013)
http://www.lemonde.fr/international/article/2013/11/28/le-japon-vote-une-loi-qui-limite-la-liberte-d-informer_3521963_3210.html

（転載ここまで）

次の報道記事に、どれだけの日本国内外の団体が反対を表明しているかが出ています。参考に。これに、海外の報道機関の特定秘密保護法批判記事が加わるわけです。

●東京新聞 (TOKYO Web)
「廃案に」強まる声　秘密保護法案　国内外から懸念
http://www.tokyo-np.co.jp/article/feature/himitsuhogo/list/CK2013120502100007.html
2013年12月5日

　国民の知る権利を侵害する恐れがある特定秘密保護法案に対し、反対を訴える動きが日本だけでなく、世界にも広がっている。安倍政権は今国会会期末の６日までに成立を目指すが、法案の危うさが明らかになる中、著名な文化人や芸術家、学者らだけでなく、あらゆる層の団体や市民らが廃案を求めて声を上げ始めている。　（関口克己）
　環境保護団体グリーンピース・ジャパンは三日正午までの二十四時間、ホームページを黒塗りにする抗議活動を実施。法案が成立すれば、国から開示される資料がさらに塗りつぶされると想定し、真っ黒の画面で「情報が真っ黒にされる時代で良いですか？」と問い掛けた。
　「原子力規制を監視する市民の会」など脱原発を訴える約二百七十団体は四日、法案に反対する声明を出した。「市民の会」の阪上武さん（４９）は「今も原発に関する情報は秘密だらけ。秘密保護法案が成立すれば、情報開示請求をするだけで処罰されかねない」。
　反対を求める動きは、法案の目的の「安全保障」とは直接、関係がない団体にも広がる。成立して、国の秘密主義が強まれば不利益を受けるからだ。
　無駄なダム計画などに反対する団体でつくる水源開発問題全国連絡会（事務局・横浜市）は、十一月上旬に緊急声明をまとめた。会は「住民の暮らしと河川環境を根底から破壊する」として多くのダム計画の情報を入手・分析して国を追及してきただけに、法案が成立すれば活動が封じられるとみている。
　遠藤保男共同代表（６９）は「国土交通相が理由を付けてダム事業を秘密指定すれば、国民がどんな計画か分からないまま、好き放題に造ってしまう」と訴える。
　法案反対の動きは、医療の世界でも始まった。三日には「法案に反対する医師と歯科医師の会」ができ、四日時点で二百三十人余が反対声明に賛同した。声明は「診療で得る患者の病歴などを、国に強制的に提供させられるかもしれない」と懸念する。
　呼び掛け人代表の麻酔医、青木正美さん（５５）は「患者のプライバシーを国が踏みにじろうとしている。法案を後世に残すことは絶対にできない」と強調した。国際的にも、国連の人権高等弁務官が「政府が不都合な情報を秘密扱いする可能性がある」などと懸念を表明。多くの人権団体も反対を訴える。

（転載ここまで）

訳付きのこちらもリンク先からどうぞ。

日本は報道の自由におけるウズベキスタン？僕の記事の《和訳》『報道の自由でウズベキスタンや中国と肩を並べる日を迎える日本』｜ジャパンタイムズ（2013.... http://t.co/per5mCFtVm　訳した方に感恩でございます

— Jake Adelstein (@jakeadelstein) December 5, 2013

次は、オーストラリアのシドニー大学のサイトから、「不特定政府不正隠ぺい法」、「不特定市民萎縮推進法」、特定秘密保護法が情報の自由に及ぼす潜在的な悪影響について考察した2013年12月1日の英文記事を。世論への委縮効果について説明されているだけではなく、日本政府の思考の中には情報の自由を尊重する意思が欠けていることにも触れています。

●The University of Sydney
Japanese Law and the Asia-Pacific
The Potential Impact of Japan’s New State Secrecy Bill on Freedom of Information
by Luke Nottage
http://blogs.usyd.edu.au/japaneselaw/2013/12/statesecrecy.html
Dec 1st, 2013

Written by Joel Rheuben (with a more extensively hyperlinked version at freedominfo.org)

As recently reported on the ABC, on 25 October the Japanese government moved to introduce to the Japanese legislature the “State Secrecy Bill” (formally, the Bill on the Protection of Designated Secrets). The government apparently hopes to make the bill law by the end of the year, in time for the establishment of a new National Security Council, which has been used as the justification for the bill.

Perhaps because of this rush, the bill is – to paraphrase Oscar Wilde – not only bad, but badly written, which is worse.

Several commentators have rightly pointed to the increased penalties under the bill for leakers within the civil service, as well as the potential risk that journalists may face prosecution, due to vaguely worded penalties for “improperly accessing” classified documents or “conspiring” to leak. The precedent for such prosecution is worrying: most famously, in 1978 the Japanese Supreme Court overturned the acquittal of Mainichi Shimbun reporter Takiji Nishiyama and found him guilty of violating the National Personnel Law. Nishiyama had been leaked documents from a Ministry of Foreign Affairs staffer, with whom he had been having a romantic relationship, in relation to the reversion of Japanese sovereignty over Okinawa in 1972. The Supreme Court held that Nishiyama had used his relationship to improperly induce the staffer to breach her official secrecy obligations. Unsurprisingly, Nishiyama has come out against the bill.

At the very least, the bill could have a chilling effect on investigative journalism in Japan. While the government did incorporate some weak safeguards into the bill at the eleventh hour, such as a requirement that agencies “take into consideration” human rights and freedom of the press, ultimately it will be necessary to have some faith in the common sense of the courts to interpret the proposed law consistently with the Constitution (although it bears mention that the constitutional protection of freedom of the press was argued without effect in the Nishiyama case).

Of potentially equal concern, however, is the total lack of oversight for classification of information as “secret”. The bill would give heads of agencies – even those with functions unrelated to national defence or security, the main standards for classification – the unilateral power to determine that information is secret. There is no provision for independent review of such determinations, nor any mechanisms for third parties to challenge them. Journalists and others could theoretically seek agency or judicial review of classification decisions under Japanese administrative law, but it is unlikely that they would be successful in demonstrating standing, or that such decisions fall within the narrow range of conduct to which review applies.

It would therefore be possible for agencies to classify as secret any politically embarrassing information, no matter how tangentially related to the classification standards, without threat of reversal. Some commentators worry that the government could seek to use the proposed law to hide information on matters like the Fukushima nuclear disaster. Even if not abused, Prof. Lawrence Repeta at Meiji University is concerned that agencies, left unchecked, will develop a culture of “overclassification”.

What is left unclear by the bill in its current form is its relationship with the Information Disclosure Law (“IDL”), the country’s main freedom of information legislation. The two laws need not necessarily be inconsistent: the State Secrecy Bill is explicitly aimed at preventing “leaks”, which presumably does not include disclosure in accordance with the formal procedures under the IDL. Moreover, it is easy to imagine cases in which classified information could nevertheless be disclosed under the law; for example, where information is partway through a classification period and the reasons for classification no longer exist.

What is more likely, however, is that classification will be used as the basis to automatically refuse requests for disclosure in accordance with the IDL exemptions relating to defence and public order (the IDL gives agencies broad discretion to refuse disclosure of documents that could, for example, “pose a risk of harm to national security” or to “trust with other countries”). If agencies and those responsible for reviewing agency decisions treat classification as conclusive for the purpose of these exemptions, it could remove documents from the appeal system established under the IDL precisely to prevent non-disclosure on the basis of political and other improper motives. This would greatly reduce the efficacy of the IDL as a whole.

On the other hand, the bill explicitly provides that classified information may be provided to members of the Information Disclosure Review Council, an independent advisory body that reviews and makes recommendations on appeals against individual non-disclosure decisions. This provision appears to presuppose the possibility that non-disclosure of classified documents could still be challenged under the IDL. If so, the IDL could yet prove to be an indirect route to expose improper classification.

Either way, the absence of clear language under the bill suggests that the drafters have not fully thought through the implications of the propose law for the IDL. As previously reported here, freedom of information does not appear to be on the Japanese government’s mind much at all. The government continues to show little enthusiasm for the Open Government Partnership, or for picking up the aborted attempt of the previous government, under the Democratic Party of Japan, to amend the IDL to allow for greater transparency. At the same time as the government introduced its State Secrecy Bill, the Democratic Party re-introduced its amendments to the IDL in the form of a private members’ bill. Unfortunately, it looks likely that only one of these bills is likely to pass.

（転載ここまで）

ブルームバーグの2013年12月3日の記事。石破茂の「テロリスト」発言について。

●Bloomberg
Japan’s Secrets Bill Turns Journalists Into Terrorists
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-02/japan-s-secrets-bill-turns-journalists-into-terrorists.html
By William PesekDec 3, 2013 7:00 AM GMT+0900

The buzz in Japanese cyberspace is that Chinese President Xi is wagging the dog by declaring a controversial “air-defense identification zone” across the East China Sea. The move has drastically ramped up tensions with Japan and the U.S., both of which have blatantly disregarded Beijing’s unilateral edict. According to one prevailing theory, Xi is whipping up an international storm to change the subject domestically away from income inequality, official corruption and China’s blackening skies.
The leader benefiting most from the controversy, though, may be Japan’s Abe. With his own populace furious over China’s unilateral decree, the prime minister is seizing the opportunity to rush a chilling official-secrets bill into law.
The entire process has echoes of George Orwell. If enacted, the secrecy law would allow government ministries to declare just about anything they want classified. It now even appears that trying to cajole information from someone privy to a state secret could warrant jail time. In other words, if I grab a beer with a bureaucrat and ask the wrong question, could I end up in handcuffs? Ambiguity reigns.
‘Terrorist’ Act
Last week, the No. 2 official in Abe’s governing Liberal Democratic Party, Shigeru Ishiba, issued a dark warning to anyone like me who might dare to question the bill. In a Nov. 29 blog post, the LDP secretary-general likened any such challenge to “an act of terrorism.” He’s since stood by his ominous statement.
No one would be surprised to see Syria or Cuba adopting a vaguely written law that could easily result in long jail terms for reporters and whistle-blowers. But a Group of Seven democracy? “How can the government respond to growing demands for transparency from a public outraged by the consequences of the Fukushima nuclear accident if it enacts a law that gives it a free hand to classify any information considered too sensitive as a ‘state secret’?” Reporters Without Borders asked in a Nov. 27 statement. Essentially, the group argued, Japan “is making investigative journalism illegal, and is trampling on the fundamental principles of the confidentiality of journalists’ sources and public interest.”
“Welcome to the land of the setting sun. Let’s see how much darker it will get,” Tokyo-based investigative reporter Jake Adelstein wrote in a Nov. 30 Japan Times op-ed. As Adelstein pointed out, the secrecy bill bears a resemblance to Japan’s pre-World War II Peace Preservation Law, which gave the government wide latitude to arrest and jail individuals who were out of step with its policies. Parts of the bill also echo the George W. Bush-Dick Cheney power grab that was the Patriot Act.
Japan’s press-freedom ranking is already in free fall. In 2013, its standing dropped 31 places from 2012 to a new low of 53rd out of 179 countries, according to Reporters Without Borders. Japan now trails South Africa and the Comoro Islands off Mozambique. The main culprit behind this year’s drop was weak reporting on radiation risks at Fukushima -- a problem that’s sure to get even worse as incentives for media self-censorship increase. If you think the powerful bureaucrats who really run Japan are too opaque with their fiefdoms and secret handshakes now, just wait.
What’s odd, and should greatly worry Japan’s 126 million people, is the urgency behind Abe’s push to pass the secrets bill. The prime minister hasn’t implemented a single structural reform in almost 12 months in office. Not one. He’s taken no important steps to deregulate, shake up or remake an overmanaged economy. But this particular legislation apparently needs to be passed, like, yesterday. If only Abe would put one-tenth this much energy into tweaking tax policies or empowering Japanese women.
Trampled Freedoms
“What’s driving this so soon after an election when it was barely mentioned is a mystery,” says legal scholar Colin Jones of Doshisha Law School in Kyoto.
The bill dovetails with the Nov. 27 creation of a U.S.- style national security council in Tokyo. In the post-Edward Snowden world, the U.S. is more paranoid than ever about sharing sensitive information. Proponents say the secrecy law is needed to ensure Japan remains a key link in the global intelligence-sharing chain. But Abe’s power grab goes too far.
The Japanese public supports Abe’s bid to defeat deflation and stand up to China, but it’s not with him on this issue. A new Asahi newspaper poll shows his public support has dropped below 50 percent thanks to the secrecy bill. Abe hopes to get this law passed by Dec. 6, and he appears to have the votes in the Diet to do so. It’s up to the terrorists -- sorry, concerned members of the public to speak out if they want to stop him.
(William Pesek is a Bloomberg View columnist.)

（転載ここまで）

「追記を表示」に少し古い英文記事を追加してあります。

仮に可決されても、自公政権とその協力勢力による民主主義廃止への反対運動と新た強い民主主義の創造運動を続けていかなければいけないと思います。

●秘密保護法を考える市民の会
秘密保護法を止めるために何ができるか、注意点はなにか？
http://stophimitsu.cocolog-nifty.com/blog/2013/11/foe-j.html
2013年11月29日 (金)

●レイバーネット日本
行動あるのみ！稀代の悪法「秘密保護法」の今国会成立を絶対止めよう！
http://www.labornetjp.org/news/2013/1385856450421staff01
Created bystaff01. Last modified on 2013-12-01 09:07:30

自由法曹団のホームページで、秘密保護法案について、参議院の安全保障に関する特別委員会のメンバーの連絡先の一覧を紹介しています。 http://t.co/UP2J6jRLZp 反対ないし慎重審議を求める声を国会議員に届けましょう。 （拡散希望）

— 長尾　忠昭 (@tadaaki_n) November 28, 2013

---

●国会議員への投書のための「議員一覧ポータルサイト」 (1)→http://taro-yamamoto.jp/お知らせ/【反tpp・反秘密保護法！】全国街宣キャラバンス/ ; (2)→http://publistella.jp/
●マスメディアへの投書のための「News for the people in Japan」マスメディア問い合わせ用リンク集→http://www.news-pj.net/link/media.html
●他の社会系ブログに行くにはうちの「私的リンク集　（適宜更新）」経由で→http://muranoserena.blog91.fc2.com/blog-entry-136.html