2015年04月22日

あなたのコメント大募集!!!

当ブログをモバイルでご覧の方はPCモードにしてくださると分かりやすいです。

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
4/21 更新 [由选举舞弊诉讼原告 - 奈良团队 撰写]
中国語訳の不正選挙&裁判レポが出来ました!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10/3更新 [Nara Election Fraud Lawsuit Report]
英語訳の不正選挙&裁判レポが出来ました!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3/5更新 チャランポランの口頭弁論調書が発覚!
12.6の法廷の音声と問題の裁判記録を公開。不正裁判のまとめレポです!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

「不正選挙追求裁判」は全国各地でいくつも起訴されていますが、
東京高裁では、即 結審です。なぜでしょう? なぜ急ぐ?
そこには国民に知られてはいけない「真実」があるからです。

2013.10.17 不正選挙追及裁判 投稿者 cherrybomb_bee
怒号が飛び交う驚愕の東京高裁の法廷映像をご覧ください。
いったい日本はどうなってるの?
くわしくは「法廷大混乱のこと」で。


不正選挙追求裁判 奈良チームは
引き続きあなたのコメントを求めています!
コメント欄を読んだ人が真の世界構造に気付く、
こんなことが考えられるからです。

7.21 参議院選挙は不正選挙でした。
現在、各地で不正選挙を許さない裁判が行なわれています。
投票結果はデタラメ。そして東京高裁での裁判もデタラメでした。
そう、日本は民主主義じゃない。ほとんどの国民がテレビ・新聞、そして教育によって洗脳されてます。
7.21参議院選挙と12.16衆議院選挙が「不正選挙」だと分かっているアナタは正常です。
そんなアナタのご意見を当ブログで募集します!!!!
「私たちは見ているぞ」「怒っているぞ!」
庶民の声がこの国を変えます! 今、革命前夜!!!
何かしたいという方はぜひぜひ。
よろしくお願いいたします。ぺこり☆

●このBlogのこの記事のコメント欄
あなたの意見を書き込んでください。
1) あなたのお住まいの都道府県 (海外の方もぜひ!)
2) 不正選挙と不正選挙裁判に対するご意見
あなたのお名前 はハンドルネームでOKです。

あなたの経験したこと、見たこと、嘆き、呟き等を自由に。
激励のコメントもよろしくです。励みにします!
※趣旨に反するコメントは削除いたします。
※ おひとりで何度でも。
※ 管理人へのご意見や雑談などは「このブログについて」にコメントしてくださいね。


Blog Top
posted by K子 at 05:49| Comment(77) | 不正選挙 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2015年04月21日

由选举舞弊诉讼原告 - 奈良团队 撰写

中国語版『チャランポランの口頭弁論調書は真実を語る』を公開します。

革命前之夜:由选举舞弊诉讼原告 - 奈良团队 撰写
这是人民的博客,这也是为人们谴责选举舞弊。日本不是一个独立的国家。日本现在必须赢得独立!我想听你的意见!
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/390215414.html
2014年3月5日
●随兴懒散的口头辩护报告讲出了真话。
“即使你去告上法庭,要求重选,你还是会输!”我大多数的朋友都告诉我,我是愚蠢的。毕竟许多以“一票之差”的诉讼,最后都没能重选。再者,我们诉讼的目的是谴责发生在日本各地的非法选举舞弊。即使起诉后,我知道世界其他国家会认为我疯了。不过,我与原告组的其余人员在大阪高等法院提起之诉讼,是要求 “于2013年7月21日,最后上议院议员选举之无效”,希望提出日本这个现实议题,即现在又多一人关注这个诉讼且没有任何聘用律师。你想的没错!这个日本正面临的现实议题,电视,报纸和学校从来没有教你。

2014年2月28日,為了阅读“平成25年(2013)行ケ第11号诉讼”的纪录,K原告抵达了大阪高等法院。奇怪的是,第二次口头答辩报告没有包含我们在11月1日的口头答辩提出的重要发言记录。这是怎么回事?我做了几页的复印件。

顺便说一句,什么是口头答辩报告?
法庭书记参加诉讼必须写其诉讼的记录。该记录必须包含证人,鉴定人及当事人的陈述,以及当事人的说明和证据,此文件一定要盖印,并由法院秘书及首席大法官签署。
http://www.courts.go.jp/saiban/qa_minzi/qa_minzi_10/
如果有人对报告异议,可以与他们答辩,直到下一次口头答辩。换句话说,直到第三口头辩护前,可提出在第二次口头答辩报告之任何异议可以作出,但我想,我们提出的异议一定会被拒绝。再者,我们的“平成25年(2013)行ケ第11号诉讼”已经结束了。因此,我们不能申辩更多的反对意见在这一点上。然而,这种口头答辩报告是如此草率,这很自然让大家认为这起诉讼不是以一个公平,公正的方式进行。此外,因为任何人都可以阅读诉讼记录,如果一个普通公民读取它们,他或她会发现,这起诉讼实际的进行方式。也许这是法院试图压制的事实。所以我决定揭露口头答辩报告之问题。

首先,我想请你看看在2013年10月6日(平成25)的第一次口头起诉报告。它有两页长。我想这是相较下较好的一个
<第1页>
記録.jpg

<第2页>
記録2.jpg

这是非常简单的,但已经说明了我们原告之声称。 我在下面將他們做一总结,
・投诉的声明
・2013年10月3日以简短的声明(原告)
・雖然被告(奈良县选举委员会)聲稱沒有禁止原告K攝影選票,但實際上摄影是被禁止的。(原告聲明)
・此诉讼是为了确定参议院(选区选举产生)成员的选举无效。 至于投诉之缘由为原告在最后一次参议院比例区代表选举时目睹了选举时的错误与违法行为,并怀疑最后一次参议院选区选举时也有相同的舞弊。
因公职选举法第204条并没有对选民有所限制,所以原告A具有起诉资格。(原告声明)

以下是写在第二次口头辩论的问题陈述。 只有一页。

記録3.jpg

它仅简单描述被告人之陈述,而并没有写出我们原告的诉讼请求。
在这一天,我(K)和另一原告(S)正在提出重要声明。因为我们有诉讼的录音(日语),你可以自行评估上述报告诽谤日本公民之程度。我总结了以下要点:



●长达约5分钟:提交的文件和视频剪辑的确认。

●约6分钟时:突然间,首席法官说,“法院发现,你们一些人在法庭内的发Twitter。 我们要求你们停止。”
K原告:“你怎么知道有人在法院发Twitter? 有任何法院人员在检查网路?”
首席法官:“我听说过这样发Twitter的报告。”

●约7分钟时:首席法官:“我猜争论已经结束......”
K原告:“首席法官,这里就是我想做出的声明。 虽然原告,被告,法官在这里都互相面对对方,我想围成一圈讨论,如果可能的话,在我们成为原告或被告前,先将大家当作选民。
我们不是站在与奈良县选举管理委员会的反对点上。这是每一位日本公民必须面对的问题。 如果你不知道你的选票去了哪里,你会有麻烦。 在计票的那天,我看到了太多的选票具有相同的笔迹,我的神经冻僵了! 它是否影响到选举的结果并不重要。重要的是这是一个很大的刑事犯罪啊。“

●约9分钟时:K原告:“许多诉讼有相同的请求正在日本到处进行着。 然而,在东京的诉讼只有一个口头诉状后就结束,且不接受任何证据。 原告完完全全地吃了闭门羹。 我在网上看到东京诉讼案的诉讼。 第一次在日本法院的历史,我看到人们法庭大唱合唱。 在东京的诉讼根本不算诉讼。 不仅我们的选举是错误的,我们的诉讼也是错误的。 在这一点上,我们应该相信谁? 事实是,我们的民主制度正在崩溃。 这场官司是一个机会,使这个国家从下往上改变。 我不希望你浪费这个机会。”

●约13分钟时:K子原告“有一些人谁犯下的罪行,会利用广大市民的天真的思想,就是没有一个人是坏的、选举舞弊是不可能的、或者没有什么是错的。 这绝对是发生遍布这个国家一个很大的犯罪。”

●约15分钟时:K原告“在罗威众议院2012年选举时,我第一次怀疑选举的的合法性。在投票指定时间终止时(晚上8点),赢得大选的消息马上在电视上发布(在小于一秒)。 这一定有误。”

●约16分钟时:K原告“关于自动投票的读者。”

●约17分钟时:K原告“事实证明,首相安倍晋三是假的首相,他得到他的位置是选举舞弊的结果。 他通过许多法律,使老百姓深受其害。 他必须被上天的惩罚。”

●约18分钟时:K原告“为什么我们没有一个系统可以马上重新评估计票? 应该是有计数误差或错误。 由于计票一直持续到第二天早上,这必定有失误。 我要求重新计票,克服一切困难。”

●约19分钟时:原告S:“在东京的两场官司,两个不同的人具有完全相同的名称坐在被告席。 这就奇怪了。”

●约20分钟时:原告S:“我有一个关于从被告的回复声明的问题。 当K原告发现的选票有问题,你有没有报告和记录的事实?”
被告:“我们写在回复声明中。”
首席法官:“已经以书面形式提交你的问题的答复......喃喃自语”他将原告的诉状拒之门外。

●约24分钟时:K原告“我是比例代表选举的上议院计票现场的观察员。 不过,我要求区域代表选举无效。有些人可能会反驳我做这件事的想法。 不过,我想在这里提出一个大的声明。 在那一天,我是检查选票笔迹是否相似唯一的一个人。 因此,我没有看到的选票都是无效的。 打开票箱,并让我看在区选举的选票。”

●约25分钟时:K原告“在计票那天,四个选举正在进行,即奈良市市长选举,奈良市代表选举,全国上议院比例和区选举。 尽管自由民主党在奈良市市长选举中失败了,自民党赢得参议院区选举。 事情很奇怪。常识会告诉你,同方应该赢。 上院区选举的结果令人怀疑。 选票需要被再次计数。 请允许我们这样做。”
“原告S想问被告关于拍摄的问题。坐在被告席的人并不是在当时在点票处的人。 因此,我知道你对任何问题皆会回答“同回复声明”。因此,我要求法官传唤奈良县选举委员会 - 行政人员作为证人。“

●约27分钟时:首席法官“答辩已经结束。 我将宣布判决12月6日......”
K原告:“什么? 12月3日? 什么?”
首席法官“十一点钟12月6日”
K原告:“你好,首席法官。 我请你传召证人。 那怎么办......?”
首席法官:“那已经以书面形式提交了”。
旁听席:“什么?!”
在旁听席的人喊道:“答辩还没有结束! 不跑了!”
法官着急地离开法庭。 在旁听席的人还在大喊。


“第二次口头辩论”之前的报道在这儿。并请看一下。
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/379211705.html

法庭必须纪录所有我们原告在第二次口头辩论之声明。 但法庭并没有这样做。 如果有人认真的纪录,它应该会有3-4页。 尽管有人试着将其简化,24分钟的内容与之后的录音文件都必须被记录下来,因为我们原告申明那些提交的文件是不够的。 特别是,原告向主审法官请求传唤证人却被驳回,这一定要记录下来。为什么事情会变成这样? 其中一个原因,是受在东京高等法院“选举舞弊审判”的影响。

类似的诉讼案在全国各地都有。 这一系列诉讼,起始于我们的审判“2013行的11号的审判”。 回想第一次在2013年10月6日的口头辩论,似乎这是一个相对较佳的一次。 点击查看详情。
http://richardkoshimizu.at.webry.info/201310/article_38.html
之后,同似的起诉也在东京高等法院进行。 虽然我以前早就听说“东京法庭在地方法院中是最腐败的”,但在东京高等法院法院发生的事情远远超出我的想象,腐败竟然是一个事实。 这很显然,如果你看过“102号原审法院纪录”。
http://dai.ly/x168vt7

在东京审判的一个月后,第二次口头答辩“2013年行的11号审判”,在大阪高等法院举行。法院的气氛完全改变了。 后卫都动员起来了,且在场并没有报纸记者。第一次口头辩论在场有两名记者分别来自读卖新闻和朝日新闻,两名记者互相合作甚至发伊妹儿和打电话给我说 “我想读被告人的回复说明。”我会将此诉讼传真至地方办公室“。 因两个记者为驻留在大阪高等法院之新闻俱乐部成员,对他们来说并不会它很难取得公众席之资格。 我请他们出席第二轮口头辩论。他们没有出现。我相信这些媒体业者受到了来自在东京高等法院的审判开始后之心理压力。一开始两位记者没有意识到事情的严重性,此事件是可以动摇这个国家基础的。

我们的原告意识到在第一轮诉讼到第二轮诉讼的变化就是证明了选举的舞弊。我们认为听证会也有相同感觉。 “不仅选举本身有失误,这个诉讼也也失误”。日本不是一个法治的国家。” “口头书面意见陈述”的误导更是最后一击,它证明了越来越多的选举舞弊证据。很明显地,肇事者与选举舞弊之主谋努力向公民们隐瞒着这个选举舞弊事。

我不得不提及严格的警卫守护。第一轮在大阪高等法院的口头辩论并没有任何警卫。 然而,在第二轮的时候,我们看到至少10位警卫。 在宣判结果当天甚至更多。一位出席大阪与东京听证会的人证实了有相同的人皆出席了这两场诉讼案。 请参阅照片描述。

警備.jpg

我听说耳朵的形状决是确定是否是同一人之重要因素。以这点来说,在照片中的男人耳朵非常相似。出席两场听证会的人亦断言不只有一个相同的人出席这两场诉讼。大阪和东京距离一点都不近。一个人怎么可能同时出现在这两个地方? 保安员并没有与法院相关联。我也感觉应该是在大阪高等法院那边。想愚昧法庭的选举舞弊肇事者与主谋,背后有着同样的犯罪组织。他们是谁?如果你想到知道更多信息,请阅读这个博客“选举舞弊的主谋”。
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/378442651.html

关于在法庭的“禁止录制”
日本是禁止在法庭在记录和拍摄。 但是,欺诈选举是政治犯罪,“录音禁令”被认为是“单方面的法庭和审判而非依宪法中所描述的”。此外,日本宪法具有如下规定。

[日本宪法]第82条第一及二项
任何审判与审判宣布皆须在公开法庭下进行。
如所有法官在不记名下皆同意一些特殊诉讼有危害公共秩序或道コ风险,这些诉讼案可以不公开进行。
然而,事件如为政治犯罪、公开犯罪、或有关人权之犯罪(宪法第三章)即必须公开审判。
[日本宪法]第99条
天皇、摄政、国务大臣、国会议员、法官和其他政府官员都有捍卫和尊重本宪法的义务。

众议院,议员的选举中,各都道府县知事选举中,众议院是直接导致政治的国家行为。 作为证明,我们需要提高在未来书写。

谷垣祯一为司法部长“称号证书”。 “指定人员进行每以下事件的司法行为为被告,奈良县选举委员会法司法部长监督的基础上的诉讼与该国的利益。”它已被写入。在“2013行的11号审判”,在大阪高等法院被告代理律师为政府指定。 因此,依宪法第82条第2节,“与人权相关的诉讼案必须向公开审判。”另一条例 “不可以以声音或拍摄记录。如有人违反,会被法院工作人员请出法院。”是违宪的。我再次重申,“选举舞弊是政治犯罪行为”。

顺便说一句,我也会大众公布下列信息。

这是第三次口头辩论的报告(裁定判刑)。 没有一位被告出庭。判刑早就在一开始就决定了。我没有必要出庭。依据上述报告作为“诉讼内容”。主审法官“依原有的基础下达判决”。 主审法官朗读这份短的判决书。 原驳回了原告A具有合法原告之资格。重新计票要求也被拒绝了,其他答辩也被驳回了。驳回意味着“这甚至不是一个问题。”此对话仅维持1分钟。 欲看审判当天报告,请按此连结。
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/382141589.html

我最后想说:日本政府尽全力对人民掩盖一切。日本是不是一个独立的国家。 娱乐媒体(包含电视等)存在的目的是为了使人民不再专心于政治。你可能会认为叙利亚内战与乌克兰政变离你很遥远。然而,这背后的主脑组织和日本的选举舞弊是同根同源的。请了解。世界是相连的。孩子的父母一定要知道。

●了解真相博客
http://richardkoshimizu.at.webry.info

一开始你可能不知道这个博客在说什么。然而,如果你继续阅读,你会发现世界与你的城镇是连接的。

末文になりましたが、
中国語翻訳をしてくださった国士に心からお礼を申しあげます。
ありがとうございます!!!

Blog Top

posted by K子 at 18:41| Comment(0) | 不正選挙 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする

2014年10月02日

Nara Election Fraud Lawsuit Report

※英語版『チャランポランの口頭弁論調書は真実を語る』を暫定公開します。
私たちは今、より正確な英訳を求めています。なぜなら本件は世界中の人に拡散する必要がある重大問題だからです。  〜フセイ選挙追求裁判 奈良チーム〜


Translation of this URL: HYPERLINK
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/390215414.html
A Night before Revolution: by the Election Fraud Lawsuit Plaintiff – Nara Team
This is the blog of the people, and for the people that condemns election fraud. Japan is not an independent country. Japan must win independence now! I want your opinions!

March 5, 2014
★ A sloppy oral pleading report tells the truth.
“So you are suing for redoing the alleged fraudulent election? I know you're gonna lose!” Many of my friends told me that I am stupid. No re-election occurred after many “the difference in the value of one vote” lawsuits, after all. Besides, the purpose of our lawsuit was to condemn the criminal election fraud happening all over Japan. Even after indictment, I knew the rest of the world would think I'm crazy. Nevertheless, I and the rest of the plaintiff group filed a lawsuit asking for “voiding the last Upper House Member Election on July 21, 2013” in Osaka Superior Court, hoping to bring the reality that Japan is facing into attention of one more person through this lawsuit without hiring any lawyer. That's right, the reality that Japan is facing, the reality that TV, newspapers, and schools will never teach you.

On February 28, 2014, I, K-ko the Plaintiff, arrived at Osaka Superior Court, in order to read the record of the “Heisei 25 (2013 AD) Gyou Ke No. 11 Lawsuit” (「平成25年行ケ11号裁判」). Strangely enough, the Second Oral Pleadings Report did not contain the record of important statements that we made during the oral pleadings on November 1. What's going on? I made a photocopy of a few pages.

By the way, what is an Oral Pleadings Report?
The court secretary attending the lawsuit must write a record of its proceedings. The record must contain the statements from witnesses, expert witnesses, and parties concerned, as well as the claims and evidences from the parties, and must be stamped and signed by the court secretary and chief justice. HYPERLINK http://www.courts.go.jp/saiban/qa_minzi/qa_minzi_10/ 
If one has objections on the Report, one can plead them until the next oral pleadings. In other words, any objections on the Second Oral Pleadings Report could be made until the Third Oral Pleadings, although I imagine that our objections would be rejected anyway. Furthermore, our “Heisei 25 (2013 AD) Gyou Ke No. 11 Lawsuit” is over already. Therefore, we cannot plead any more objections at this point. However, this Oral Pleadings Report is so sloppy that it is natural for anyone to think that this lawsuit was not conducted in a fair and just manner. Furthermore, since anyone can read the lawsuit records, if an ordinary citizen reads them, he or she will find out the actual way that the lawsuit was conducted. Maybe the Court is trying to suppress the fact. So, I decided to expose the Oral Pleadings Report in question.

First, I would like you to take a look at the Report of the First Oral Pleading on October 6, 2013 (Heisei 25). This is two-page long. I guess this is one of the better ones...
First page
記録.jpg
Chief Judge's stamp
Report of the First Oral Pleading

Case ID: Heisei 25 (Gyou-ke) No. 11
Date: 10:30 AM, October 4, Heisei 25 (2013)
Place and Openness to the Public: Osaka Superior Court No. 9 Civil Court, Open to the Public
Chief Judge: Jun-Ichi Kaneko
Judge: Takuya Ueda
Judge: Satoko Koike
Secretary: Hiroshi Yokomichi
Attendees:
Plaintiff: Keiko Oyagi (K-ko, the author of this blog)
Plaintiff: -
Plaintiff: -
Attorney of Defendant: Kazutaka Tanaka
Attorney of Defendant: Akinori Nishino
Attorney of Defendant: Toshihioko Nakano
Attorney of Defendant: Kenji Imai
Attorney of Defendant: Yosuke Omori
Designated Deadline: 10:30 AM in November 1, Heisei 25 (2013)

Contents:
Plaintiffs
Explanation of the Letter of Pleadings
Explanation of the prepared documents as of October 3, Heisei 25 (2013)
On the Defense Statement “No. 3 Recognition or denial of the cause of the pleading” 2(5) ”a (ア)”, vote counting managers and workers claimed that they never prohibited photography. However, photography was actually prohibited.

Second page
記録2.jpg
Although this lawsuit demands voiding the last Upper House (district) representative election, the reason for this pleading is that the plaintiff believes that the same illegal facts that she observed during the Upper House (proportional) representative election should have been taking place during the last Upper House (district) representative election.
We the plaintiffs submit the prepared documents, statement of pleadings, explanation of documentary evidences, and evidence submission statement.

Plaintiff A :
The Public Servant Election Law, Article No. 204 does not place any limitations on voters. Therefore, she is eligible to become a plaintiff in this lawsuit.

The Defendants:
Explanation of the Reply Statement
They object to the claims on the Prepared Documents as of October 3, Heisei 25 (2013).
Evidences are on the separate sheets.

Hiroshi Yokomichi, Secretary of the Court (stamped)

Although the Report is simple, it contains our pleadings. I will summarize them below:

Stating the petition
Statement prepared by the plaintiff as of October 3, 2013 (Heisei 25)
Although the defendant, the Nara Prefecture Election Administration Commission claims that its members did not prohibit K-ko the Plaintiff from taking photographs of the ballots, photography was actually prohibited (Plaintiff's claim).
This lawsuit asks for voiding the last Upper House Representative Election. The reasons for this statement on the petition are that the Plaintiff witnessed fraudulent and illegal election practices during the last Upper House Proportional Representation Election, and is suspicious that the same practices are done during the last Upper House District Election.
Plaintiff A has the full qualification as a plaintiff, due to the fact that the Public Servant Election Law, Article No. 204 does not impose any limitations on voters (Plaintiff's claim).

The following is the Second Oral Pleadings Report in question. It is only one page.

First page

記録3.jpg
Chief Judge's stamp
Report of the Second Oral Pleading

Case ID: Heisei 25 (Gyou-ke) No. 11
Date: 10:30 AM, November 1, Heisei 25 (2013)
Place and Openness to the Public: Osaka Superior Court No. 9 Civil Court, Open to the Public
Chief Judge: Jun-Ichi Kaneko
Judge: Takuya Ueda
Judge: Satoko Koike
Secretary: Naoki Betsumura
Attendees:
Plaintiff: Keiko Oyagi (K-ko, the author of this blog)
Plaintiff: -
Attorney of Defendant: Kazutaka Tanaka
Attorney of Defendant: Yoshie Mitsuhashi
Attorney of Defendant: Toshihioko Nakano
Attorney of Defendant: Kenji Imai
Attorney of Defendant: Yosuke Omori
Designated Deadline: 11:00 AM in December 6, Heisei 25 (2013), Sentence to be announced

Contents:
Defendants:
Statement of the Prepared Document No. 1 (as of November 1, Heisei 25 [2013])
Evidences on the appendix

Chief Judge
End of Pleadings

Court Secretary: Naoki Betsumura (Stamped)

It simply writes the statement of the Defendants, without writing any of the statements from us, the Plaintiffs.

On this day, I, K-ko, and another Plaintiff S were making important claims. Because we have the voice recording of the court proceedings (in Japanese), you can evaluate for yourself the extent that the above Report is defaming Japanese citizens. I summarize the important points below:




Up to 5 min: Confirmation of submitted documents and video clips

Around 6 min: All the sudden, the Chief Judge said “the Court has found out that some of you inside the Court are tweeting in the Twitter. We ask you to stop that.”
K-ko the Plaintiff: “how did you know that someone in the court is tweeting? Are any Court workers accessing the Internet?”
Chief Judge: “I heard a report of such tweeting.”

Around 7 min: Chief Judge: “I guess the debate is over...”
K-ko the Plaintiff: “Chief Judge, here is something that I want to make a statement. Although Plaintiffs, Defendants, and Judges are facing each other in this place, I want to discuss in a circle, if possible, for all of us here are voters, before being Plaintiffs or Defendants. We are not standing in opposition with Nara Prefecture Election Administration Commission. This is the problem that every one of Japanese citizens must face. If you don't know where your ballot went, you have a problem. On the day of vote counting, I saw too many ballots with the same handwriting, so many that it chilled my nerves. Whether or not it affects the outcome of the election does not matter. This is a big criminal offense.”

Around 9 min: K-ko the Plaintiff: “A number of lawsuits with the same claim are being conducted everywhere in Japan. However, the lawsuit in Tokyo was ended after only one oral pleading, without accepting any evidences. The Plaintiffs were literally shut out of the gate. I saw the proceedings of this Tokyo lawsuit on the Internet. For the first time in the history of the Japanese courts, I saw people inside the court yelling in chorus ('Sprechchor' in German). The lawsuit in Tokyo was not a lawsuit at all. Not only our elections are wrong, our lawsuits are also wrong. At this point, what should we believe? The fact is, our democratic system is collapsing. This lawsuit is a chance to change this country from the bottom up. I don't want you to waste this chance.”

Around 13 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “There are some people who commit crimes, taking advantage of the naiveness of the general public thinking that no one is bad, election fraud is impossible, or nothing is wrong. This is a big crime definitely taking place all over this country.”

Around 15 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “I first doubted the legitimacy of elections during the Lowe House Election in 2012. The news of winning election was on TV as soon as (within less than a second of) the designated time of ballot casting termination (8:00 PM). Something is wrong.”

Around 16 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “About the automatic ballot reader”

Around 17 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “It turns out that Prime Minister Abe is a FAKE Prime Minister, who took his position as a result of election fraud. He is passing many laws that make ordinary people suffer. He must be punished by Heaven.”

Around 18 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “Why don't we have the system to re-evaluate the vote count in the first place? There should be error or mistakes in counting. Since the vote counting lasted until the next morning, there must be mistakes. I ask for vote recount, against all odds.”

Around 19 min: Plaintiff S: “In two lawsuits in Tokyo, two different persons with exactly the same name were sitting in the Defendants' bench. This is strange.”

Around 20 min: Plaintiff S: “I have a question regarding the Reply Statement from the Defendants. When K-ko the Plaintiff found the ballots in question, did you report and record the fact?”
Defendant: “It is as we wrote in the Reply Statement.”
Chief Judge: “The reply to your question has been submitted in writing...'mumbling'” He shut out the pleading of Plaintiffs.

Around 24 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “I was an observer of Proportional Representative Election in the Upper House Vote Counting Site. However, I am asking for voiding the District Representative Election. Some people may argue against my idea of doing it. Nevertheless, I want to make a big statement right here. On that day, I was the only one who investigated ballots with an eye on the similarity of handwriting among ballots. Therefore, any ballot that I have not seen is null and void. Open up the ballot boxes and show me the ballots in the District Election.”

Around 25 min: K-ko the Plaintiff “On the day of vote counting, four elections were taking place, namely Nara City Mayoral Election, Nara City Representative Election, National Upper House Proportional and District Elections. Although the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) lost in the Nara City Mayoral Election, LDP won the Upper House District Election. Something is strange. Common sense will tell you that the same party should win. The result of the Upper House District Election is loaded with suspicions. The ballots need to be counted again. Please allow us to do that.
“The Plaintiff S asked you the Defendants a question about photographing. The people sitting in the Defendants' bench are not the ones who were at the site of vote counting. Hence, I know that you will answer whatever questions we may ask “as written in the Reply Statement.” Therefore, I ask Judges to summon Nara Prefecture Election Administratio Commission workers as witnesses.”

Around 27 min: Chief Judge “The debate is over. I will announce the sentence on December 6...”
K-ko the Plaintiff: “What? Third of December? What?”
Chief Judge “Eleven O'clock on December 6.”
K-ko the Plaintiff: “Hello, Chief Judge. I asked you to summon witnesses. What about that...?”
Chief Judge: “That has been submitted in writing.”
Gallery: “What?!”
People in the gallery yells: “The debate is not over! Don't run away!”
Judges left the court in a hurry. People in the gallery were still yelling.


Here (URL link) is the previous reports of the Second Oral Pleadings (in Japanese).
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/379211705.html

The Court must record whatever we the Plaintiffs claimed during the Second Oral Pleadings. However, the Court did not do that. If one makes a serious effort to record it, it should be around three to four pages. Even if one tries to abbreviate, the contents of the 24 min and thereafter of the voice recording must be written because we the Plaintiffs claimed that the submitted documents were not enough. Particularly, the facts that the Plaintiffs asked the Chief Judge to summon witnesses and the Chief Judge rejected must be recorded for sure. Why is that happening? One reason is the effect of the “election fraud lawsuit” in Tokyo Superior Court.

Lawsuits with claims similar to this lawsuit took place everywhere in Japan. Among this series of lawsuits, the first trial was from our lawsuit “Heisei 25 (2013 AD) Gyou Ke No. 11 Lawsuit” (「平成25年行ケ11号裁判」). When I look back at the First Oral Pleadings on October 6, 2013, I think that this was one of the better ones. Details → (URL, in Japanese)
http://richardkoshimizu.at.webry.info/201310/article_38.html


After that, similar lawsuits took place in Tokyo Superior Court. Although I have been hearing that “Courts in Tokyo are the most corrupted among local courts,” the event that exceeded my imagination took place in Tokyo Superior Court, and the corruption was confirmed as a fact. It is obvious if you watch “Court video recording of the 102th Lawsuit, URL, in Japanese).
http://dai.ly/x168vt7

Then, one month after the Tokyo trial, the Second Oral Pleadings of “Heisei 25 (2013 AD) Gyou Ke No. 11 Lawsuit” (「平成25年行ケ11号裁判」) took place in Osaka Superior Court. The atmosphere of the Court changed completely. Security officers were everywhere around the courtroom, and there were no press reporters from newspaper companies. Two reporters, one from Yomiuri Newspaper and one from Asahi Newspaper, were in the Gallery during the First Oral Pleadings. Those two reporters were very cooperative, and even e-mailed and phone called me and said “I want to read the Reply Statement of the Defendants” and “I will fax about this lawsuit to our local offices.” Since those reporters are the members of the press club stationed in Osaka Superior Court, it is not difficult for them to sit in the Gallery. I asked them to “sit in the Gallery of the Second Oral Pleadings.” Nothing happened. They didn't come. I believe that press was censored after the beginning of the Tokyo Superior Court lawsuit. From the very beginning, those press reporters did not have a clue as to the seriousness of the matter, the matter that shakes this country from the bottom up.
We the Plaintiffs felt that the change from the First to the Second trial is an evidence that the election fraud took place. We believe that the Gallery felt the same, too. “Not only the election is wrong, the lawsuit is also wrong. Japan is not a constitutional state.” To make the matters worse, a misconduct in the “Oral Pleadings Report” writing was revealed, which further adds up as an evidence for election fraud. Apparently the perpetrators and the mastermind of this election fraud are serious about covering up this fact from citizens.

I must mention about heavy security guards. There were not security guard during the First Oral Pleadings in Osaka Superior Court. However, during the Second Oral Pleadings, we saw at least ten security guards. There were far more of those during the day of Sentencing. A person who was at the Galleries of both Osaka and Tokyo Superior Courts testified that exactly the same persons were at both Courts. Look at the photo below:

警備.jpg

I heard that the shape of an ear is a key to decide on an identity of a person. From that perspective, the ear shapes of the men in photo are very similar. The person at the Galleries also asserted that not just one, but a few others were in both Courts. Osaka and Tokyo are not close at all. How can a same person be guarding two places that are far away? Guards were not affiliated with Courts. I think so, too, as a feeling at the site of Osaka Superior Court. The perpetrators of the election fraud and the mastermind that wants to cheat in the court are from the same criminal organization. Who are they? If you want to know more, please read an article in this blog “Mastermind of Election Fraud → URL, in Japanese.”
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/378442651.html

*Regarding the “Prohibition of Voice Recording” in a Courtroom
The Japanese Courts prohibit voice or video recordings in Courtrooms. However, because an illegal conduct during an election is a political crime, “prohibition of voice recording” can be judged as a “judgement by a court alone without any constitutional ground.” Furthermore, the Constitution of Japan has the following Article:

Constitution of Japan, Article 82 Clause 1 and 2

Article 82
Any trial and sentencing of any lawsuit must be conducted in public.
If all judges in a court unanimously agreed that a particular trial threatens the public order or moral, the trial may be conducted without being in public. However, trials regarding political crime, crime on press, or cases on issues of human rights as guaranteed in Chapter 3 of this Constitution must be conducted in public at all times.

Article 99
The Emperor, Regents, Ministers, National Capitol House Representatives, Judges, and other public servants are obliged to respect and protect this Constitution.

National Lower and Upper House Elections and Prefecture Gubernatorial Elections are directly related to national politics. The following document is an evidence:

記録5.jpg


No. 332802 Stamped
Letter of Appointment
Bureau and Address: Osaka Justice Bureau, Department of Lawsuit
Osaka Justice Bureau North Building
1-11-4, Tenma, Kita-ku, Osaka City 530-0047
Names: Chief: Kazutaka Tanaka
Senior Officer: Akinori Nishino
Senior Officer: Yoshie Mitsuhashi
Office: Toshihiko Nakano
The above persons are appointed as affiliates to conduct lawsuit of the following case that related to the interest of the Nation on behalf of the Defendant, Nara Prefecture Election Administration Commission, according to the statutes regarding the privileges of the Minister of Justice.

September 25, Heisei 25 (2013)

Minister of Justice: Sadakazu Tanigaki

Regarding:
Osaka Superior Court, Civil Department No. 9
Heisei 25 (2013 AD) Gyou Ke No. 11 Lawsuit (「平成25年行ケ11号裁判」)
Plaintiff: Keiko Oyagi (K-ko the Plaintiff) and two others
Defendant: Nara Prefecture Election Administration Commission

This is the Letter of Appointment by Mr. Tanigaki, the Minister of Justice. It says, “The above persons are appointed as affiliates to conduct lawsuit of the following case that related to the interest of the Nation on behalf of the Defendant, Nara Prefecture Election Administration Commission, according to the statutes regarding the privileges of the Minister of Justice.” The Defendant-appointed attorneys for Heisei 25 (2013 AD) Gyou Ke No. 11 Lawsuit (「平成25年行ケ11号裁判」) in Osaka Superior Court were appointed by the National Government. Therefore, according to the Constitution of Japan, Article 2 Clause 2, “trials regarding cases on issues of human rights must be conducted in public at all times,” the act of “prohibiting voice or video recording or photographing, and dismissing anyone who does those” by court workers is unconstitutional. I repeat. Election fraud is a political crime.

I will make the following document public, too:

記録4.jpg

Chief Judge's stamp
Report of the Third Oral Pleadings Report (Announcement of the Sentence)
Case ID: Heisei 25 (Gyou-ke) No. 11
Date: 11:00 AM, December 6, Heisei 25 (2013)
Place and Openness to the Public: Osaka Superior Court No. 9 Civil Court, Open to the Public
Chief Judge: Jun-Ichi Kaneko
Judge: Takuya Ueda
Judge: Satoko Koike
Secretary: Hiroshi Yokomichi
Attendees:
Plaintiff: Keiko Oyagi (K-ko, the author of this blog)

Contents:
Chief Judge
Sentenced according to the Letter of Sentence
Court Secretary: Hiroshi Yokomichi (Stamped)

This is the Report of the Third Oral Pleadings (Announcement of the Sentence). None of the Defendants attended. The Sentence was fixed from the very beginning. I did not have to attend. According to the above Report, as a “content of the trial,” Chief Judge “Sentenced according to the Letter of Sentence.” The Chief Judge actually read a short sentence. The claim of the Plaintiff A to have the legitimate qualification as a Plaintiff was rejected. Our plead for re-counting votes was rejected. Other pleads by us were dismissed. Dismissal means “out of question.” It lasted only one minute. For the report of the Sentence Day, follow the link (URL, in Japanese).
http://fuseisenkyo.seesaa.net/article/382141589.html

My last words: The Japanese National Government is covering up what citizens must know by full force. Japan is not a sovereign (independent) nation. Entertainment contents in the media such as TV exists to divert the attention of citizens from politics. You might think that civil war in Syria and coup d'etat in Ukraine are happening at some places far away from you. However, the mastermind organization behind the scene is the same as the one conducting election fraud in Japan. Please realize that. The whole world is interconnected. Parents of kids must know that.

The blog to know the truth → in Japanese, HYPERLINK
http://richardkoshimizu.at.webry.info
You may not understand at first what the blog is saying. If you continue reading it, however, you will understand that the world and your town are connected.

The End.


末文ですが、懇切丁寧に英訳してくださった国士に心から感謝。
ありがとうございます!

K子


Blog Top
posted by K子 at 22:36| Comment(0) | 不正選挙 | このブログの読者になる | 更新情報をチェックする
×

この広告は1年以上新しい記事の投稿がないブログに表示されております。