Overview of the Document
Document title:
Report on the Results of the Legal Consultation Concerning the Petition, together with the Materials Used for the Consultation
Document management number:
590671
Dates prepared:
April 19 and April 23, 2025
Prepared by:
Secretariat of the Sukagawa City Council
Method of acquisition:
Obtained through an information disclosure request
Document type:
Internal approval document, materials used for the legal consultation, and record of the consultation results
Publication format:
PDF file with personal information and other non-public information redacted where necessary
Original Japanese PDF:
Facts Confirmed by the Document
The documents concern a legal consultation conducted on April 19, 2025, after a petition seeking an investigation and corrective measures was submitted to the Chairperson of the Sukagawa City Council on April 3, 2025.
The Sukagawa City Council Secretariat processed the consultation results as an internal report dated April 23, 2025.
The internal approval document records that the legal consultation was conducted from 6:00 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. on April 19, 2025.
Officials of the Sukagawa City Council Secretariat attended the consultation.
Officials of the Citizen Collaboration Promotion Division of Sukagawa City were also present.
The free legal consultation framework of the Sukagawa City Council of Social Welfare was used for the consultation.
The materials used for the consultation describe the four resignation recommendation resolutions adopted between 2011 and 2012 and summarize the petition submitted in 2025.
The petition requested an independent investigation by a third-party body, publication of the results, withdrawal of the resolutions, apologies by the relevant parties, corrective measures, and the establishment of formal guidelines to prevent recurrence.
The matters submitted for legal consultation included the handling of the petition, the relationship with the State Redress Act, the legal assessment of the claims stated in the petition, the involvement of the City Council Secretariat, and whether the petition should be published on the Council website.
Key Statements
1. Statement Concerning a “Presumption Close to Guilt”
The record of the consultation results contains the following statement:
In addition, because he had been arrested, there was no problem with making a presumption close to guilt.
This is the central statement in the document.
An arrest is not a conviction.
An arrest is a measure taken during an investigation. It does not establish criminal guilt.
A person charged with a criminal offence must be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
The statement recorded in the consultation materials raises a fundamental question: whether a public institution may treat an arrested person as being close to guilty before a criminal judgment has been rendered.
The document is an internal record summarizing the consultation results.
It is not a verbatim transcript.
It is not a written legal opinion prepared and signed by the attorney.
Accordingly, the statement is presented here as a statement recorded in the internal documents concerning the legal consultation.
It is not presented as a verbatim quotation from the attorney.
Nevertheless, the Sukagawa City Council Secretariat recorded this statement as part of the consultation results and relied on the consultation when determining how to handle the petition.
Its meaning must therefore be examined.
2. Statement Concerning Due Process
The record of the consultation results contains the following statement in substance:
If the action had legally binding force, such as expulsion from the Council, an opportunity to provide an explanation would be necessary and the absence of such an opportunity would be unlawful. In this case, however, the measure was only a recommendation and had no legally binding force. Therefore, there was no problem.
The first resignation recommendation resolution was adopted while the person concerned was detained before indictment.
He was not provided with a sufficient opportunity to present an explanation or rebuttal before the resolution was adopted.
A resignation recommendation resolution may lack formal legal binding force.
However, a resolution adopted by a public institution may still seriously affect a person’s reputation, political status, social standing, and ability to receive a fair trial.
The absence of formal legal binding force does not, by itself, answer the question of whether due process was required.
3. Statement Concerning the Handling of the Petition
The consultation record contains the following statement in substance:
The Constitution is not something that can be used by a private individual. The document may be handled as an ordinary petition. Since a petition is a request, the Council may decide how to handle it.
The consultation record also states in substance:
The Council should respond in accordance with its internal rules.
The petition requested a written response.
The consultation record contains the following statement:
There is no obligation to respond.
The petition did not merely ask the Council to express a discretionary opinion.
It alleged constitutional violations and human rights violations by a public institution.
It requested an investigation, publication of the results, withdrawal of the resolutions, apologies, corrective measures, and institutional safeguards against recurrence.
The question is therefore not limited to whether the Council had a formal procedural obligation to issue a written response.
It is also necessary to examine whether the Council had an obligation to investigate and remedy the alleged human rights violations after receiving a specific request for corrective measures.
4. Statements Concerning the State Redress Act
The consultation record states in substance that, because the conduct at issue was carried out by the Council, any claim for damages under the State Redress Act would be brought against the City.
The record also states in substance that the conduct was carried out for a public purpose and would therefore not be regarded as unlawful.
It further states in substance that, even if the conduct had been unlawful, a damages claim would be considered time-barred because three years had elapsed since the applicant became aware of the persons responsible.
The existence of a public purpose does not automatically establish the legality of a public institution’s conduct.
The means, contents, procedures, and effects of the conduct must also be examined.
The issue raised by the petition was not limited to a damages claim concerning the original resolutions adopted between 2011 and 2012.
The petition also raised the question of whether the alleged violations remained unexamined and uncorrected in 2025.
5. Statement Concerning the Involvement of the City Council Secretariat
The consultation record contains the following statement in substance:
Even if the City Council Secretariat was involved, responding to instructions from Council members would be regarded as a natural part of its work. It would not be unconstitutional and would not constitute a violation of the obligation to respect and uphold the Constitution.
This statement raises a significant question.
Public officials have their own duties to comply with laws and regulations and to respect and uphold the Constitution.
The existence of instructions from Council members does not necessarily eliminate the need for an independent legal assessment of the conduct of the City Council Secretariat.
It is necessary to examine what instructions were given, by whom, for what purpose, and how the Secretariat responded.
6. Statement Concerning Non-Publication of the Petition
The consultation record contains the following statement in substance:
Publication of the petition on the Council website is optional. Therefore, it is permissible not to publish it.
The Sukagawa City Council website publishes other petitions.
The question is not limited to whether publication was legally mandatory in the abstract.
It is also necessary to examine whether the decision not to publish this particular petition was based on the same standards applied to other petitions.
7. Statement Concerning the Four Resignation Recommendation Resolutions
The consultation record addresses the fact that resignation recommendation resolutions were adopted four times.
In response to a question concerning the repeated adoption of resolutions based on the same underlying matter, the consultation record contains the following statement in substance:
The fourth resolution may be understood as a response to the fact that he had not reflected on his conduct.
The first resignation recommendation resolution was adopted while the person concerned was detained before indictment.
The second resolution was adopted before the first criminal hearing.
The third and fourth resolutions were adopted later.
The cumulative effect of four resolutions must be examined.
The question is not merely whether each resolution can be described separately.
It is also necessary to examine whether the repeated resolutions amounted to continuing institutional and political pressure.
8. Use of the Free Legal Consultation Framework of the Sukagawa City Council of Social Welfare
The documents show that the legal consultation used the free legal consultation framework of the Sukagawa City Council of Social Welfare.
The consultation was not conducted to address an individual resident’s personal legal difficulty.
It was conducted by the Sukagawa City Council Secretariat and relevant City officials to consider how public institutions should respond to a petition alleging constitutional violations and human rights violations arising from past public conduct.
The use of this framework raises questions concerning the purpose of the consultation system, the use of a consultation slot intended for residents, and the relationship with public expenditure.
Questions Raised by the Document
1. Can an arrest justify a “presumption close to guilt”?
The consultation record contains the statement:
In addition, because he had been arrested, there was no problem with making a presumption close to guilt.
An arrest is not a conviction.
What legal basis could justify a presumption approaching guilt before a criminal judgment has been rendered?
How can such a view be reconciled with the presumption of innocence?
2. Does the absence of formal legal binding force eliminate the need for due process?
The consultation record states in substance that no procedural problem arose because the resignation recommendation resolution lacked formal legal binding force.
However, the resolution was adopted by a public institution.
It was capable of seriously affecting the reputation, political status, and social standing of the person concerned.
It may also have affected the environment surrounding the criminal proceedings.
Can the absence of formal legal binding force alone eliminate the need to provide an opportunity to respond?
3. Was it unnecessary to examine the effects of the repeated resolutions adopted before judgment?
The first resignation recommendation resolution was adopted while the person concerned was detained.
The second was adopted before the first criminal hearing.
Four resolutions were adopted in total.
Was it unnecessary to investigate their cumulative effect on public opinion, media reporting, political status, and the fairness of the criminal proceedings?
4. Does a public purpose automatically eliminate unlawfulness?
The consultation record states in substance that the conduct was carried out for a public purpose and would therefore not be regarded as unlawful.
However, public institutions must also comply with constitutional and legal standards.
Can unlawfulness be denied solely because a public purpose was asserted?
5. Are actions of the City Council Secretariat always justified when based on instructions from Council members?
The consultation record states in substance that responding to instructions from Council members would be a natural part of the work of the Secretariat.
However, public officials have their own legal obligations.
Can instructions from Council members automatically justify the involvement of the Secretariat?
Was it unnecessary to investigate the contents of the instructions, the persons involved, and the actions taken?
6. Was it appropriate to use the free legal consultation framework of the Sukagawa City Council of Social Welfare?
The consultation concerned the internal response of public institutions to a petition alleging human rights violations arising from past public conduct.
Was it consistent with the purpose of the system to use a free legal consultation slot intended for residents?
If attorney compensation or other public expenditure was involved, was the use of that framework appropriate?
7. Was there no obligation to investigate and correct the alleged violations in 2025?
The petition requested an investigation, publication of the results, withdrawal of the resolutions, apologies, corrective measures, and safeguards against recurrence.
The consultation record states in substance that there was no obligation to respond.
However, when a public institution receives a specific allegation of human rights violations, is it sufficient merely to state that no formal obligation to respond exists?
Was there no obligation to examine whether a continuing violation or omission required corrective measures?
8. Was the decision not to publish this petition consistent with the treatment of other petitions?
The consultation record states in substance that publication of the petition on the Council website was optional.
However, other petitions have been published on the Sukagawa City Council website.
Was the decision not to publish this particular petition based on the same standards?
Was there a rational and objective reason for the difference in treatment?
Relevant Legal Standards
Constitution of Japan
Article 13:
The relationship between the conduct at issue and respect for individuals, personal dignity, and personal interests must be examined.
Article 14, paragraph 1:
The relationship between the non-publication of this petition and the treatment of other petitions must be examined.
Article 31:
The relationship between due process and an adverse assessment made by a public institution without providing a sufficient opportunity to respond must be examined.
Article 76, paragraph 3:
The relationship between an assessment approaching guilt before judgment and judicial independence must be examined.
Article 98, paragraph 2:
The relationship between the response of the Council and Japan’s obligation to faithfully observe treaties and established laws of nations must be examined.
Article 99:
The relationship between the conduct at issue and the obligation of City Council members and other public officials to respect and uphold the Constitution must be examined.
Local Public Service Act
Article 30:
The relationship between the conduct of local public officials and their duty to serve the public interest must be examined.
Article 32:
The relationship between the conduct of local public officials and their duty to comply with laws and regulations must be examined.
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Article 14, paragraph 2:
Everyone charged with a criminal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law.
Article 2, paragraph 3:
The relationship between the handling of the petition and the obligation to ensure an effective remedy must be examined.
Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties
Article 26:
Every treaty in force is binding upon the parties and must be performed in good faith.
Article 27:
A party may not invoke provisions of its internal law as justification for its failure to perform a treaty.
Human Rights Committee General Comments
General Comment No. 32, paragraph 30:
Public authorities must refrain from prejudging the outcome of a trial, including by making public statements affirming the guilt of an accused person before guilt has been established according to law.
General Comment No. 31:
States must ensure effective remedies, cease continuing violations, and provide appropriate reparation where Covenant rights have been violated.
Articles on Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts
Article 1:
Every internationally wrongful act of a State entails the international responsibility of that State.
Article 2:
An internationally wrongful act exists when conduct attributable to the State constitutes a breach of an international obligation.
Article 4:
The conduct of an organ of a local government may be attributable to the State under international law.
Article 12:
A breach exists when an act or omission is not in conformity with an international obligation.
Article 14:
A breach resulting from a continuing act or omission may continue for as long as the conduct remains inconsistent with the obligation.
Article 30:
A State responsible for an internationally wrongful act must cease the act and, where appropriate, offer assurances and guarantees of non-repetition.
Article 31:
A responsible State must make full reparation for the injury caused by the internationally wrongful act.
Article 32:
A State may not rely on its internal law as justification for failure to comply with its obligations arising from international responsibility.
Relevance to This Case
This document is not one of the resignation recommendation resolutions adopted between 2011 and 2012.
It is an internal document created in 2025 after a petition specifically requesting an investigation and corrective measures was submitted to the Chairperson of the Sukagawa City Council.
The document shows the issues on which the Sukagawa City Council Secretariat sought legal advice.
It also shows the consultation results recorded internally by the Secretariat.
The most important statement is:
In addition, because he had been arrested, there was no problem with making a presumption close to guilt.
The presumption of innocence does not cease to apply when a person is arrested.
It applies precisely when a person is suspected, arrested, detained, prosecuted, and exposed to the risk of being treated as guilty before judgment.
The first resignation recommendation resolution was adopted while the person concerned was detained before indictment.
The second was adopted before the first criminal hearing.
The Council subsequently adopted two further resolutions.
The document is therefore important when examining the relationship between the repeated resignation recommendation resolutions, the presumption of innocence, due process, the involvement of the City Council Secretariat, and the obligation to investigate and correct alleged human rights violations after a specific request for a remedy was submitted in 2025.
The document is also important when examining whether the use of the free legal consultation framework of the Sukagawa City Council of Social Welfare was consistent with the purpose of that system and whether any related public expenditure was appropriate.
Related Documents
Japanese-Language Version of This Article
Previous Evidence Article
Sukagawa City Internal Documents: Legal Consultation Conducted after a Request for Corrective Measures Concerning Human Rights Violations
Next Evidence Article
Sukagawa City Internal Document: Specifications for the Fiscal Year 2025 Multilayered Support System Development Project
Related Evidence Articles
Petition Submitted to the Sukagawa City Council Seeking an Independent Review and Corrective Measures Concerning the Resignation Recommendation Resolutions
Written Request Submitted to Sukagawa City Seeking an Investigation and Corrective Measures for Human Rights Violations
Response Issued by Sukagawa City on April 28, 2025
Response Issued by the Sukagawa City Council on April 28, 2025
Related Analysis Pages
Record and Examination of the Case: Part 4 — Violation of the Presumption of Innocence
Record and Examination of the Case: Part 5 — Efforts to Obtain a Remedy
Legal Arguments and Structure of the Constitutional and Legal Violations