Greenpeace activists arrested in Japan
Blog Post
Wednesday 25th June 2008, 5:43pm
by TimNorton in
Japanese police have arrested two Greenpeace activists for exposing a whale meat scandal involving the government-sponsored whaling program.
The two activists, Junichi Sato, 31, and Toru Suzuki, 41, are being investigated for allegedly stealing a box of whale meat which they presented as evidence.
According to Greenpeace, the box of expensive cuts of whale meat had been illicitly removed by crew of the Nisshin Maru, the whaling factory ship, following this year's Southern Ocean whale hunt. Its contents were marked 'cardboard' and it was shipped to a private address. Tracked by Greenpeace investigators, it was intercepted and turned over to the Public Prosecutor in Tokyo, as evidence of wide-scale corruption at the heart of the whaling operation in the Southern Ocean Whale Sanctuary.
The two activists are to be held another ten days without charge by Japanese police. No charges have been laid relating to the embezzlement of whale meat, and that the Japanese Public Prosecutor has subsequently dropped his investigation into the involvement of the crew and whaling officials in this illegal trade.
The response of the Japanese Authorities in sending forty police officers to raid the Greenpeace offices and seize all computers and financial records is a disproportionate reaction to this matter, which raises concerns that this is a politically motivated action designed to shut down the successful Greenpeace public education campaign within Japan at the time of the IWC meeting.
The Australian Government should be pressing the Japanese Government to take action on the alleged embezzlement of whale meat, and to either charge the Greenpeace activists with an offence or release them.
You can read the full Greenpeace report on the evidence collected and sign the petition to the Japanese Prime Minister and Foreign Minister to demand the activists’ immediate release.
PDF version
Bookmark, email and share
Comments
The two Greenpeace activists
The two Greenpeace activists were not arrested for "exposing a whale meat scandal" (that is how PR spinsters working for a very embarassed Greenpeace International are trying to sell it).
They were arrested for, alledgedly, trespassing on private property and stealing a package. After alledgedly stealing the package, it took them more than a month to hand the box over to officials, and only after they were criticised for having taken it in the first place. "Presenting the box as evidence" is more spin from a very embarassed Greenpeace International.
Further, although Greenpeace alledged the package contained meat that a Kyodo Senpaku crew member had stolen from Kyodo Senpaku, Kyodo Senpaku and Tokyo Prosecutors Office were both satisfied that the meat was that which Kyodo Senpaku had gifted to crew members, as a part of their employment arrangements. Thus the crew did not "illicitly remove" the meat. The Tokyo Prosecutors Office investigated Greenpeace Japan's allegations for about a month before deciding not to prosecute, stating that there was no suspicion of wrong-doing, after looking into the claims.
Police are continuing to investigate whether the Greenpeace organization was involved in the planning and execution of the trespass and theft crimes committed by two of their members.
It's interesting that a political party in Australia would see fit to publish Greenpeace's spin on this matter on their official blog, unless of course you think it is as funny as we here in Japan do. I don't think Greenpeace has a future in Japan as an environmental NGO, considering their illegal and hypocritical methods.
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, you seem
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, you seem well informed on one version of events. How did you acquire your information?
Good question mcfarm I also
Good question mcfarm
I also like how quickly Matsumoto's response was posted here. Are the Japanese (either official or public) monitoring the news (and blogosphere) that closely, that they feel the need to jump on any mention of this issue with such gusto?
I am told the rape of
I am told the rape of Nanking didn't take place in the official Japanese version of history either.
mcfarm, if you could read
mcfarm, if you could read Japanese too you'd have no problem acquiring the information. This has been a headline story here in Japan, and I'm amazed to see how different the version of events that Greenpeace is spinning out to it's fan club in the west. Nanking? You are familiar with Godwin's law I suppose.
Harvey S, my response was posted here after I saw this blog as a headline in the english news at google.
If you doubt my information, do some checking for yourselves. Some english news sources have reported it reasonably accurately.
Truth, like beauty, is in
Truth, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder, but a headline story in Japan is about a box of whale meat? So I don't need to read Japanese to be cynical about the Japanese press. We really shouldn't believe all we read in the press, no matter the language.
The Godwin defence to gag discussion? I don't think so, but let me rephrase, as Nanking is obviously a sore point. If the Japanese government and press are prepared to obfuscate about the big things of history, how can they be trusted with the small? Why should anyone believe a version of events from the Japanese press, born of Japanese Govt. spin, a Govt. with a vested interest in the outcome being unfavourable for Greenpeace at this point in time?
The headlines are about
The headlines are about Greenpeace getting arrested for commiting crimes, all just in order to accuse their nemesis, the whalers, of crimes. Not a box of whale meat. "So, Greenpeace came out and accused the whalers of embezzling whale meat, but in the end wound up arrested themselves for having stolen whale meat ... ", noted one news caster the other evening. Perhaps the irony is lost on lovers of Greenpeace.
The Godwin defence is not intended to "gag discussion", although I don't intend to be commenting on war time issues, which have nothing to do with Greenpeace commiting crimes today in 2008.
But, you are welcome to be paranoid about the Japanese media on this issue, and trust ever word Greenpeace says, if you are so inclined.
Good day.
Cynicism is hardly paranoia,
Cynicism is hardly paranoia, and somewhere between the two versions of events stand the facts.
Trust Greenpeace? About as much as I trust the Japanese governments version of the 'truth'. Both use spin, but Greenpeace is far more open and transparent in it's objectives and tactics. The fact that GP must fight fire with fire and use spin, is a sad reflection of the systemic covert and corrupt nature of it's adversaries.
But ask yourself this: is it really headline material that two people were arrested for trespass and allegedly stealing one box of whale meat? If the persons involved were not from Greenpeace, would the news even make page 17? So it appears the headlines are politically motivated spin. Who has the most to gain form such a story beat up? Could it be the Japanese government and the whalers negotiating at the IWC? And how is the Japanese Prime Minister's popularity at home these days?
Perhaps the Japanese government and whaling spin doctors have more influence over the Japanese press in Japan than Greenpeace, what do you think?
To Mcfarm, Mr. Matsumoto's
To Mcfarm,
Mr. Matsumoto's information about this subject is correct. The two Greenpeace members,by their own admission,took a box from a private shipping company. The shipping company filed a criminal complaint with the police. The police arrested the Greenpeace members for theft,nothing more.
Why should anyone believe Greenpeace's version of events, For that matter?They have,even more,of a vested interest in a favorable outcome,i.e. staying out of jail.
However,if you cannot trust the Japanese. Perhaps you can trust Paul Watson. He's white,by the way. He had a few words for Greenpeace on the SS website. Of course,he added his own propaganda spin to this issue.
You expressed skepticism about the Japanese government and press because of past actions. A person might have equal skepticism about the Australian government and press on enviromental issues. Since 1788, 23 species of birds,4 frogs and 27 mammals have been rendered extinct in Australia. That kind of enviromental record does not lend much credibility to them as leaders in animal conservation.
So Mark, a theft of a box
So Mark, a theft of a box has occurred, criminal charges laid and two people arrested "nothing more". Then why is it headline news in Japan? The disproportionate response alone should ring alarm bells.
Me, trust a politician in power and their hand fed press? I don't care if they are black white or brindle, I view them all with suspicion.
And so you allude my posts are racist in motivation. I really must tell the Japanese exchange students and wwoofers, not to mention the Koreans, French, Chinese, Germans, Nigerians, Dutch, Cambodians and all other nationalities I welcome into my home for weeks on end, that I'm a racist. They're not all white by the way either, and would appreciate the joke.
I have no opinion of Paul Watson, I haven't studied the individual.
Species extinctions are a tragedy, and Australia fully admits to having the fastest rate of extinction of any continent. We are also working hard to redress the wrongs of our forebears who introduced the pests.
As for your logic, since when do the wrongs of one nation justify the wrongs of another? A comparative wrong is still a wrong, and using a comparative wrong is an admission of wrong by the one one doing the comparing. So the 'your wrong is bigger than mine' is hardly a defense, it is simply the pot calling the kettle black - but I think we have had this discussion before.
mcfarm, The headline story
mcfarm,
The headline story was created in part because of Greenpeace's publicity of their original complaint against the whalers. But it backfired, because at the time people were concerned that their "investigation" methods were illegal, and this would set a dangerous precedent. Is it OK to commit a crime in order to "gain evidence" for you yourself to make allegations of crimes by others? If it is, then hell I could go break into Greenpeace's offices, file through their cabinets and computers, and even take one if I decided that it was "evidence" (of some crime I might dream up).
The reality is that even police require writs etc before they can take such actions.
It hit the headlines again the other day because it turned out that Greenpeace were arrested themselves, despite having made accustations against others.
Little has been "gained" by the whalers out of this. On the contrary there is a suggestion that they may take legal action against Greenpeace for their wrong allegations and possible reputational damage. But the reputational damage to the whalers isn't much compared to the shame that Greenpeace Japan has heaped upon itself.
What I find deplorable is the way that Greenpeace International has sought to spin this story so as to try to garner more support from the international community, and absolutely misleading them in order to do so. For a group that claims to be for the noble objective of environmental conservation, this group seems like a big fraud outfit. I'm sure Greenpeace do some good things somewhere, but as for their vendetta against whaling it's way off the rails.
"Little has been
"Little has been “gained” by the whalers out of this", and yet you claim great shame for Greenpeace. I thought the perception of shame carried great political weight in Japan? Japanese Prime Ministers have left office due to 'great shame'. If the Government and whalers, via the press, have succeeded in attributing great shame to Greenpeace, that is the equivalent of a big political spin win.
To then use the law to 'prove' the shame by suing for damages is a predictable tactic of spin. The law is not about shame, right or wrong, or even justice - it is about the law.
If a law prevents you from achieving a goal and you break that law, all you have done is break a law. If you believe that law to be in error or obstructive, there is no guilt or shame associated. To wit, the leader of the Australian Greens has been arrested more than once for breaking an Australian law he deemed obstructive. Yet he keeps getting elected, this must be "because it is well known that Australia is populated entirely by a race of criminals".
Greenpeace's shame has been
Greenpeace's shame has been brought upon themselves by their commiting crimes in a fit of cult-like desperation seeking to pin a crime on their nemesis, not the government or the whalers. Greenpeace's crimes and their subsequent arrest are Greenpeace's responsibility, not any one else's.
This is common sense here in Japan, I thought it would have been a kind of standard globally. I might have that wrong I guess.
Oh now you Aussies have me
Oh now you Aussies have me rolling all over the floor:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23925278-5013871,00.html
Posting Greenpeace's propaganda on a political blog is one thing, but your Senate now passing such a motion, all on the basis of what Greenpeace has told you? Is this level of prudence how all decisions in Australia are made?
I think you're missing that
I think you're missing that these activists told the prosecutor’s office about the box, offered to turn it over and asked for an investigation. The activists don't want the box of whale meat. They didn't take it for personal gain. They just gave it to the prosecutor because action was needed to expose secret tax-payer-funded corruption. From the start they made themselves available - with full explanations - to the police and the proscutor. Yet the police used heavy-handed force to take them into custody right as the IWC commenced. It's all political. This is what happens when you expose people with power. We should stand up for people who are just trying to expose corruption.
Matsumoto - you're also
Matsumoto - you're also ignoring a key point here.
These activists are being held without trial, until the IWC is over.
Tell me that's not a purely political move...
Also, you seem very
Also, you seem very interested in the topic - perhaps you would be willing to disclose your employers?
Wouldn't be the Cetacean Institute would it?
Greenpeace does not have
Greenpeace does not have shame because they do not believe they have done 'wrong', perhaps they have broken a law they consider obstructive, but no more than that. But I accept that the Japanese concept of shame is different.
Common sense is also culturally based, so we agree to disagree.
We shall see just who will be whose nemesis. A battle lost now and then is not so important, but the war to save the whales from slaughter will be won in the end.
You may laugh at Australians (we do), and you will probably think this funny too, but ponder the implications.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/26/2286356.htm
Matt, That's the "legal
Matt,
That's the "legal advice" that Greenpeace supposedly have regarding their actions. I don't know the details of the law, but I'll be suprised if that stands up in court. If it doesn't I could head along to Greenpeace's office, break in, steal (sorry, "take as evidence") a computer, submit it to the prosectors a whole month later with a grand story about Greenpeace's criminal behavior - and not be arrested or prosecuted for it.
Harvey S, the alledged criminals are being held without trial because they've only just been arrested and are still under investigation. Trials come later.
Political? Greenpeace exposed their own crime a month ago (they chose the timing), police started investigating, and subsequently made arrests. You've been watching too much X-files I reckon (see also your questioning whether I work for the Cetacean Institute).
Here's a simple rule that even primary school kids can understand:
Don't trespass and take away private property, and you won't end up in prison. Take responsibility for your own actions, kids. Take responsibility for your own actions...
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, your
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, your 'kid' is injured, do you obey all the traffic laws on your way to hospital and risk the loss of your kid's life? Do you take responsibility for your actions and child's life, or obey the rule of law? Life is never patronisingly simple.
mcfarm, You're right that
mcfarm, You're right that Greenpeace appear not to believe they have done wrong. This belief will make matters worse for them.
"war to save the whales from slaughter will be won in the end", is that some kind of prophecy?
The story from Spain is interesting though..
mcfarm, I don't accept your
mcfarm, I don't accept your comparison. Apples and oranges. But as I think we found, common sense seems to differ between where we come from.
22 Matsumoto, you criticise
22 Matsumoto, you criticise our Australian Senate at 14! At least our political parties in Australia do not have to pay around US $52,000 to stand candidates to contest an election, as in Japan!. I doubt whether your parliament is very representative of the Japanese community, only Japanese business interests which is what 'Scientific Whaling' is all about, making money from slabs of whale meat!
The greenpeace activists
The greenpeace activists should not have broken the law. I don't believe it was either justified or even helpful to their cause in this case.
The Japanese police should either charge the activists or let them go. Holding them for ten days without charge is obscene. The government should also investigate the alleged black market for whale meat.
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, the 'war'
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, the 'war' comment was metaphorical. Greenpeace may lose a court case, but eventually the whale slaughter will be stopped.
A prediction; first the southern oceans will be declared a whale sanctuary, and then the sanctuary will be extended to all international waters. Not sure when either will come to fruition, but the process is well under way.
My point about the 'kid' and law breaking is to show that sometimes laws must be broken for a perceived greater good. We simply disagree over what that greater good is.
Brenton, the position of the
Brenton, the position of the Japanese government is that marine resources should be regarded as a source of food, and it is important to study such natural resources, and of course the Japanese government hopes the moratorium will be lifted so commercial harvests can be resumed soon. Not so different from Australia. Look what I found.
http://www.environment.gov.au/biodiversity/trade-use/publications/kangar...
"While Australia's laws concerning wildlife trade are some of the most stringent in the world, they are not intended to obstruct the sustainable activities of legitimate organisations and individuals. Instead they have been designed to demonstrate that, when managed effectively, wildlife trade contributes to and is entirely compatible with the objectives of wildlife conservation."
I think it's just a matter of time before Australia starts applying it's principles to whales as well. I also heard Australia had trouble recently with kangaroo culling. It will be too hard for Australia to maintain inconsistent wildlife policies over the long term.
The 327th male, the thieves are still under questioning, and they'll almost certainly be charged. The police also investigated Greenpeace's allegations about the black market, but found no problems. You should not be suprised if Greenpeace are also arrested for filing false charges or obstructing officials from their duty. Greenpeace should have thought twice before running it's bnaseless negative propaganda campaign.
mcfarm, "first the southern oceans will be declared a whale sanctuary", this already happened. 1994.
"and then the sanctuary will be extended to all international waters", this already happened. 1982.
All the pure types of Green
All the pure types of Green Activists as protectors of whales and all the pure Japanese defenders of the cause of Japanese Law are here.So pure in intent that jojoba bean oil will never be mentioned or indeed ,wether two people claiming territorial significance over common sense can ,in fact, be using common sense.Then there is mentioned primary schools,like a familarity exists between schools in the two distinct countries,Japan and Australia. The other strange reality I note,between these types presenting the common sense,is the accused seem definitely Japanese.The Law is Japanese. And the IWC is international,and so at times are the unemployed as non-police officers. Whereas Bob Brown's dad was a Police Officer in simpler times. I cannot stand the phoney talking down of the friendly but critical Japanese common sense displayed here,or some Tasmanian I would suspect claiming a National territorial assemblance of common sense. We all know as individuals even the protestors in Japan,their Police,The Whalers and the Greenpeace Activists etc. would get on pretty easily together if there wasnt this dispute. After all,Tasmanians could try getting more Police from Japan down for a holiday in Tassie,via a whaleboat,bringing motorbikes,even a boat, and whatever else they wanted to bring.Why dont the Japanese Police claim the Whaling fleet in part or whole as useful for their purposes in Japan!?Did that hurt!? A different attitude!?Bring the IWC with camper beds!?
Ten days for questioning?
Ten days for questioning? I'd call that imprisonment.
Kangaroos aren't endangered, whales are.
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, I suppose
Matsumoto Kiyoshi, I suppose my definition of a future whale sanctuary would exclude the permitting of lethal 'scientific research'. Such obvious circumventions of the spirit and intent of the sanctuaries would then not be tolerated. Furthermore, the sanctuaries would be exclusion zones for non signatories.
It interests me that in all the preceding posts you are very firm on the letter of the law, but when the spirit and intent of a law are disagreeable to you and Japan, there is no problem using loopholes to bypass said law (via 'scientific research' or detention without charge or trial). Obviously this says you and your country are 'law abiding', but in breaking the spirit and intent of a law, what does it say about integrity?
Now before you rush off to find evidence of Australia's lack of integrity on some issue, let me say it again, two wrongs don't make a right. I am absolutely sure Australia lacks integrity on some issues, but that does not excuse Japan's lack of integrity on the whaling issue of the jailing of the Greenpeace activists.
And as for ten days for questioning over a box of whale meat? Any reasonable system of justice would say this is excessive. So either the Japanese system of justice is excessive in dealing with alleged minor crimes, or there is another agenda.
What was I saying about the
What was I saying about the 'war' being won? It will be won incrementally.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/06/27/2287381.htm
Post new comment