Den folgenden Bericht hat mein Freund auf Englisch über seine Begegnung mit der japanischen Justizmaschine niedergeschrieben hat. Erst jetzt, mehrere Jahre später, hat er mir erlaubt, ihn hier zu veröffentlichen (Namen sämtlich geändert).

Mein Freund wurde von der japanischen Polizei festgenommen, als die Polizei nach einem Komplizen seines iranischen Hausnachbarn in Tokio suchte, der als Drogendealer angezeigt worden war. Der Informant hatte den Komplizen als "Ausländer mit Glatze" beschrieben - das traf auch auf meinen Freund zu. Das und die Hausnachbarschaft sollten auch die einzigen Indizien bleiben, die Polizei und Staatsanwaltschaft während der 23 Tage, die sie meinen Freund festhielten, liefern konnten. Dabei war der Iraner überhaupt erst lange, nachdem der Informant ihn und den Komplizen beobachtet hatte, in das Apartment im Haus meines Freundes gezogen. Spätestens diese chronologische Unstimmigkeit hätte meinen Freund wieder auf freien Fuss bringen müssen.

Nicht so in Japan. Niemand fühlte sich verantwortlich. Es war allen Beteiligten wichtiger, das Gesicht zu wahren und die einmal angeleierte Tretmühle bis zum bitteren Ende durchzuziehen, als einem offensichtlich Unschuldigen zu seinem Recht zu verhelfen. Ganz deutlich wird auch, dass den Verantwortlichen ein falsches Geständnis meines Freundes sehr zupass gekommen wäre - sogar um den Preis, dass der wahre Komplize dann weiterhin ungestört Drogen verkaufen würde.

This is the true story how my Canadian friend got kidnapped by the Japanese police. He wrote it down and allowed me to publish it on the web for him.

7:40PM, Sunday 7 July 2002. I am lying on my futon watching a B-production movie starring Pierce Brosnan. Not very impressive, but helps me relax. Even though it is Sunday, I spent most of the day in school working on my thesis. The deadline is on the 22nd and I was naive enough to nonchalantly suggest to my professor to have a first draft ready for comments two weeks before the deadline. That would be tomorrow and the thesis is still missing a whole chapter... At least I can relax for a couple of hours watching this movie. I am quite hungry but my girlfriend is getting off around 8PM and we are to have dinner in one of the local restaurants. Nothing else to do but wait. Wait and try to enjoy the movie.

Suddenly I heard noise close to my front door. It sounded like somebody is trying to open the front door but having difficulty with it. Needless to say, I was surprised and went to check as to what exactly was going on. My girlfriend was not due to arrive for another 30min. As I was approaching the front door between five and eight persons burst through it yelling "Police! Police! (Keisatsu,Keisatsu)" After one of them showed me the ID and what looked to be like a search warrant, I had no choice but to cooperate. After searching my pockets, they started searching the apartment. .

One of them kept talking to me the whole time asking me wide a array of questions. As I did not commit any crime, I could not figure what exactly I could have done to mandate such a police action. After asking several times they finally told me that I am a (suspected??) drug dealer. A drug dealer? I asked again and he replied yes and we have evidence so you better confess right now because it will make everything easier. If we find something it will be worse than if you confess now. I answered as calmly as I could -- look as much as you want, for I don't even use drugs, not to mention selling. After searching through my apartment for some 45 minutes, all of sudden a cop from the other room yelled "Found it.(Atta)" At that time I was very confused so I asked to verify "You found it?" but one of them replied "Don't worry, it is not here but in the apartment next door -- where your friend lives." .

At that time I thought I figured out why they came to my door. Obviously they thought that I was a friend of the guy living next door and even worse that I was dealing drugs with him. For me it seemed like a clear case of prejudice. I did not know whether the other guy was doing anything or not but he was definitely not my friend nor accomplice. They must have been looking for two foreigners and since I was the next closest one, I was the obvious choice. But, I was hoping, since they will not find anything in the apartment maybe they will realize their mistake. That it was a mistake was more so evident as during the search there were several remarks about me being from Iran or some other Middle Eastern country. The whole process culminated when after about hour and a half of searching my apartment a "Translator" came to talk to me. He was speaking a strange language (which turned out to be Farsi) and after it became obvious that I do not understand him, he left. At this point there was a bit of confusion but the person that seemed to be in charge said "He understands some Japanese so arrest him in Japanese" and they did so. At that time they showed me the "Arrest Warrant" and said they were arresting me for "selling JPY10,000 of Marijuana and JPY5,000 of Cocaine to Nakada Masakazu on October 15th of 2001." They did not inform me of any of my rights or of the normal procedure. Since I am a bit familiar with American Judicial system through study and movies, I asked whether I am entitled to make one phone-call. At least I could do, I thought, is instruct my girlfriend to contact my embassy and potentially look for a lawyer. However, I was denied. After taking several essentials (they told me that I will be gone for only couple of days) with me I was taken away. To summarize, I was not told of any rights I might have (right to remain silent, right to a lawyer, etc.) at the point of arrest. .

After getting to the police station, I had to sign lot of papers about the possessions that I have taken with me. My pictures and fingerprints were also taken. When I had to use the toilet they made me urinate into a plastic cup. Again they did not tell me whether I had a right to refuse a urine sample, but since I was confident it would be negative I did not object too much. Throughout these proceedings, whenever I asked as to why I was arrested they would reply "Our investigation led us to you" or "We have plenty evidence." Finally we came to a form which informed me about my right to have a lawyer. A police officer (I believe his name was Shindoo) informed me that I have a right to have a lawyer, but when I answered that I would like a lawyer but I do not know anybody, he was trying to write it down like I do not want a lawyer right now. As I protested heavily and refused to agree to such wording, he decided to try calling an English translator to translate this form to me. After talking through a translator, I was still complaining a bit so this form was left unsigned. The problem that I had is that they did not tell me that I have a right to a assigned lawyer (Toban Bengoshi) if I did not know of one myself, so it seemed I would forfeit my right to a lawyer by signing. I was basically trying to get some counselling before signing any forms (for I did not know how the forms might be used) but they did not inform me of a way this was possible so I did not sign. .

During the questioning, I did find for a fact that a person living in apartment #201 was also arrested and that there were some drugs found during the search of his apartment. They actually did not tell me directly but have talked about it among themselves. However, I did not find out his name or about any information that would point to our involvement or friendship. Particularly strange was that while they were looking through several versions of my IDs (living in several countries like I did results in an almost suspiciously large number of IDs) one of the officers pointed to a particular picture and said something like "This one really looks like the other picture." That made me believe that they have some kind of a picture that links me to the case. Nonetheless, nothing was officially related to me and probably the only reason that I caught the above comment was that some of the police were still not aware that I could speak Japanese and to what extent. .

Since the guy living next door was stationed at the Oi police station I was taken to Kamata precinct. Early next day (2002/07/08) I was taken for the first questioning. This time an English translator was present. The questions were very meaningless in my opinion as they were asking about my previous education and employment saying that they would check it, but they were writing all the names in Katakana. Even I could not be able to connect those transliterations with the original names so there is no way they could have contacted my country and have any of that data verified. They did ask me whether I did sell any drugs on the 2001/10/15 and my reply was not on that or any other day. However, they did not ask anything about my relationship with the person living next door or anything that would justify their statements that there is "plenty evidence" against me. During the questioning, I was able to get some information on Japanese legal proceedings from the translator. .

They also informed me that I could have the my embassy contacted and I asked to have the questioning moved to after I was able to talk to somebody from the embassy. Therefore, I have refused to sign the paper which has talked about my past, but I did sign the form that said that they have informed me about my right to have a lawyer once they have rephrased the statement to say that "I will decide on the lawyer once I have consulted with a consular representative from my embassy." Again, I was not quite clear whether they were trying to frame me with this crime and would try to use some innocent looking forms against me or whether they were doing everything by the law. I tried to point out that my masters thesis was due on the 2002/07/23 and that if I was not able to submit it by that time I would not be able to graduate and would consequently loose my scholarship and be forced to leave Japan. In that case it does not matter to me whether they will charge and convict me, for I am done with Japan. .

In the afternoon of the same day (2002/07/08) I was able to meet with a consular representative of my embassy who was also my personal friend. To my dismay, I was told that there is not much the embassy can do on my behalf except insist on having a translator present whenever I was questioned. Besides that, I was pretty much on my own. However, from personal experience the representative who was a lawyer back home, gave me advice not to sign anything I am not absolutely sure about and to try to cooperate with the police. .

Few hours later, I had an another visit which left me much more relaxed. It was Kitagawa-sensei, a lawyer that my girlfriend was able to arrange to come for a free counselling session. I was able to get some information on the Japanese legal system and on the regular proceedings. To my surprise, I found out that regardless of whether I had a lawyer or not, I would have to be alone during the questioning (What is the benefit of the lawyer? I ask if she cannot be present when I am being questioned) and that they can keep me under arrest for a tremendously long 23days without releasing any evidence. Of course, the law is written as if the 20+ days arrests are necessary in only extremely complicated cases when it is not possible to decide whether the suspect should be charged or not. To come to that point one would have to meet the prosecutor at least twice and a judge at least once. At these interviews they would decide "based on the evidence" what was proper course of action. .

During this conversation I realized how I have missed some important points from the Arrest warrant and during the questioning -- for example I was not sure whether there was an another person listed on the warrant or not. This could be of crucial importance to the development of the case but I could not tell with certainty. I did know for a fact that the person living next door was also arrested and had a good reason to believe him to be Iranian (or at least a Farsi speaker). I tried to clarify the relationship between me and him. Basically he moved into the apartment sometimes in early 2002 (at least several months after the alleged drug sale) and I have seen him walking in and out of the apartment on several occasions. I have never talked with him except exchanging the greetings, always in Japanese. As this is pretty normal relationship between neighbors in Tokyo, I did not find it strange. How did police decide that we were friend and accomplices, was still a mystery for me. At this point, I was not sure whether the police would try to plant some evidence in my apartment or in some other way try to produce "substantial evidence" as to my involvement. After all, they had "plenty of evidence proving my involvement" to start with, so I could not be sure. However, the lawyer assured me that there would be no such discrepancies so I relaxed a bit. I was thinking that since they did not find any drugs in my apartment, my urine is clean and there is no record of any relationship with my neighbor (as certainly would be the case if there is no messing with the evidence) I would be released very soon. I guess I should have known better. .

The next day (2002/07/09), I was taken to the central prosecutor office in Tokyo (close to Kasumi ga Seki subway station) for questioning. The treatment on these questioning days borders inhumane. The prisoners are made to sit on hardwood benches for an 8 hour or so period without conversation, laying, or standing around the cell. The prisoners are all cuffed for the whole period except one hour break for lunch. My first interview with the Prosecutor lasted at most ten minutes. I was informed of the Japanese judicial procedure with the emphasis on words like "based on the hard evidence" and "adequate punishment for the committed crimes." I was also informed of the right to remain silent, but was not explained what is actually implied by silence. As I did not have anything to hide, I forgot to ask my lawyer to clarify this concept. In the US, the questions that are not answered cannot be applied against the prosecuted person, but did silence in Japan imply confession? One would expect it to be similar to US, but very few other aspects of the criminal procedure made sense, so I had to wonder. Nonetheless, after I was explained the proceedings I was asked only two questions. The first was whether I lived at (address), appartment #203 which I answered to with yes. The other question was whether I committed the crime listed on the arrest warrant. After I said I did not and that I do not even know who Jaffar Salehi, the other person who was listed on the warrant, is, these statements were written down and I signed them. Then the questioning was over. There were no questions about what I was doing on the day of the crime (2001/10/15) or whether I had any relationship to my next door neighbor or some drug organization - nothing. Just two questions and I was asked to return. After few more hours of gruelling wait, I was returned to Kamata. .

Next day (2002/07/10) was even worse. I was taken to Kasumi ga Seki again, this time to meet with the judge. The judge did not even look at my face when I was questioned and the form was already written when I arrived into the office. The only addition made to it was that the name of my country was entered under a clause allowing a diplomatic representative from ____ country to visit me in the precinct. When was asked whether I committed the crime listed on the arrest warrant, I reiterated again that I did not and that I do not even know who Jaffar Salehi is. At that time judge said that once the investigation is over and if I am formally charged I will have plenty of opportunity to defend myself through a lawyer. When I came out of the office, the translator brought me a form saying that there is sufficient evidence to believe that I have destroyed evidence pertaining to the case and that for that the prosecutor was granted a right to hold me in custody for another 10 days starting from 2002/07/09. Furthermore, because I could leak some information to the outside, I was to be forbidden any visits except from my lawyer and representative of my embassy. So instead of listening to my statements and looking at evidence they did find (no drugs in my possession, no drugs in my urine and no phone number(s) that would connect me to the case) I was "accused" of destroying evidence. Needless to say, at this point I was not convinced I was getting fair treatment or that I would not be convicted as a drug dealer regardless of existence of any evidence or the truth. After this explanation was given to me, I returned to my waiting cell to wait for return to Kamata precinct. During this time, I got another visit from my lawyer who herself did not look very confident at this point. She told me that according to the account from my landlord the police had Nakada Masakazu identify my picture as a person who sold him drugs. .

After returning to Kamata, I had a chance to talk with other inmates who were very knowledgeable of Japanese judicial procedure and very informative. Apparently, most people who are arrested are automatically held to the legal limit of 20+ days. The only exception to this rule are cases where the crime is traffic related or settled out of court. Any other cases are likely to stay for the legal limit. That would imply that almost every case is "very complicated and requires maximum time for decision as to whether to charge" someone. Furthermore, the whole investigation is revolving around getting a signed confession of the crime. Once this confession is obtained it is a mare formality to convict the accused in court of law. Since the lawyer is not allowed to be present during the questioning, I can see how people might succumb to the pressure and sign some "confessions" without totally understanding the consequences. .

The life in the precinct was not overly hard. Compared to the trips for questioning at the central prosecutor office they were a fairy tale. I was able to get non-meat meals and to get some reading material. The food was identical every day with rice covered with some kind of salty flakes (furikake gohan) for breakfast, two buns with a bag or butter and jam for lunch and a rice with fried assortment of vegetables and fish (bento) for dinner. Besides this, every inmate was able to order a banana, milk or coffee for dinner and sometimes fried noodles or carry with rice for lunch at one's own expense. At night we were able to get a futon with several blankets to sleep on and even the lights which were constantly turned on did not disturb me after a while. In the morning we had to clean our cell and the newest guy in had the privilege to clean the toilet with out any cleaner or gloves. The sleeping time was from 9PM to 6:30AM. The meals were at 7AM,12PM and 5PM respectively. From 9AM to 8:30PM we were able to read manga and other reading materials from the precinct library and at 9AM smokers were allowed to smoke two cigarettes. .

My next questioning at the Oi police was on 2002/07/13. At this time I was finally asked whether I had an alibi for 2001/10/15 and whether I knew who Jaffar Salehi was. At that time I was also shown a picture of my next door neighbor which I identified as such. Again I was allowed to say that I was not friends with this person. There was no mention of my picture which was supposedly identified by Nakada. I would expect that they would show me the picture and ask me whether it was me or at least show it to my lawyer. After seeing this picture they would be able to have a direction for questioning. But they did not, so the questioning was pretty unrelated to the case. They asked me about my previous encounters with drugs and about my sources of income and so on. The only thing that directly related to the case was the questioning about what I did on 2001/10/15. Since it was more than seven months before the questioning and I was not able to access my computer or any other records that would refresh my memory there was not much I could say but I gave an account of what I believed I did on the day. Here again I tried to point out that my neighbor probably did not live in the apartment building at the time of the crime and that we could not have met at a different place especially since I did not have any Iranian friends and very few non-school related friends so we could not have a chance encounter before he moved into my apartment building. To my great relief, I was able to get an informal no to my questions as to whether there were any drugs found in my apartment or in my urine. That would mean that at this point police also knew that there were no drugs that I could be connected to. .

Surely, once they have realized that there they cannot connect me to drug possession or use and not prove my connection to my alleged accomplice, there is nothing to warrant keeping me in custody longer. Also when I met with my lawyer again, she told me that police toned their statement from "Picture was identified by Nakada" to "It is very similar to the person who sold the drugs (to Nakada)." Again not me nor my lawyer were shown the picture in question. We were given the explanation that the police and the prosecutor are not required to release any evidence until I am formally charged. Once I am formally charged they are required to present all the evidence they plan to use in court. In other words, they can arrest and hold me for 20+ days without showing any evidence and possibly without having any tangible evidence at all. The fact that the "identified" can turn to "very similar" does not instill confidence although is definitely the right direction of altering statements. Nonetheless, since there is no further evidence that would connect me to the case it should become irrelevant even if it was a positive identification considering the fact that the identification was taking place more than six months after the event. As I have suspected, the contract by which Salehi moved into the apartment (alas signed by a fake company) was signed on 2001/12/15 or about two months after the crime took place. The contract was signed after an introduction by a local real-estate agency Mini-Mini and had no connection with me. So since the picture in question was never shown, I am not sure it was a picture of me in the first place or that it was a picture good enough to warrant an arrest warrant. All evidence that was surfacing (as far as my knowledge goes) was pointing in direction that I did not have any connection to my neighbor except living in the same apartment and we only started living in the same apartment months after the crime took place. Seems clear cut? Not in prosecutor's eyes. .

On the 2002/07/17 I was taken for mid-term questioning at the prosecutor's office. At this time I came to a point where I was convinced that I would be charged regardless of the evidence. This time the questioning was at least an hour long and somewhat more substantial in content. However, after questions about the relationship with my neighbor and relationships I had otherwise, we moved to talking about my income. At this point the prosecutor was asking me where I was getting my income from but when I tried to suggest checking directly with the companies I was mentioning as well as with my school the subject would shift rapidly to a different line of questioning. Once I was able to refute possible discrepancies as for example a high number of trips abroad -- which were financed partially by my school and partially by my part-time employers, we would move on the different subject, for example my cellular phone conversation. After I would suggest that getting the information directly from AU (I was paying extra to have a listing of all phone calls made form my phone stored on the company computer and sent to me in monthly statements) I got a reply that that is not necessary and that they would like to get the information as I remember it. Again, I found it very strange that they would not check with my employers or with my phone company even without me suggesting it (and after getting out I found out that they did not check with my employers). The remainder of the questioning consisted of what I considered strange questions like "How long does take from your apartment to the train station" and "Are there any empty houses on the way to the station." At the end of the questioning, I was told again that there is sufficient evidence to mandate the extension of my detainment for another 10 days. Surely, if there was so much evidence that I am a drug-dealer and there were more than one of these incidents (which would allow me sufficient income to travel abroad. JPY15,000 would hardly buy a ticket to Hiroshima and not to mention my home country, for example) questioning would have been more potent. Again I tried to point out that my thesis was due in several days and that by keeping me in custody without evidence (which I thought was obvious) they are punishing me beyond necessity. Nonetheless, I was to be kept in custody for additional 10 days. .

Several days later, during the visit with my lawyer I was able to obtain significant information about my movements on 2001/10/15. I had asked my lawyer to check with my school and my part-time work to verify if there are any logs remaining on the computers or if there is any record of e-mails I received or sent on the day. With help from several people in the school laboratory and at work, my lawyer was able to obtain records of several mails verifying my movements on that day witnessing that I was in school in the morning and worked in the afternoon up until the time of the crime. Since the records remained on the computers and were not changed by me they should be significantly strong to be admitted as evidence. .

My next questioning was on 2002/07/20 at the Oi police station. This set of questioning was least to say not directly related to the case. I was asked questions about my eating habits and so on. At this point I could definitely feel that the officer questioning me believed into my innocence. Several explanations were given that justified arrest of my neighbor. Apparently police watched the apartment building for at least a week or so and saw him selling drugs to somebody. While that would justify his arrest, it was still not clear to me what I did to get arrested and why it would be necessary to hold me in custody for at least 20+ days. Nonetheless, given the circumstances, I was very glad to hear that the officer was apologetic (informally) when talking about the case. I was even told that my school will accept my thesis even if it is late provided I am not convicted of any crime. .

The last questioning was at the prosecutor office on the 2002/07/25. Actually, this was not really a questioning but typing up of my statement from the previous questioning. Previous conversations were summarized in one big statement. At that time my answers were paraphrased and changed from the original. At times I tried to object at the phrasing but the prosecutor would always answer that she was the one making decision and that my comments would be disregarded. I got the same reply when I tried to insert the new information I had obtained from my lawyer since the previous questioning. I would think that if I have record of the location I was during the time of the crime it would be important enough to make its way into the final statement but the prosecutor again said she decides what is important and this is not important enough. Doesn't this seem strange? However, since my lawyer is not present I am not sure as to how much I should stress various points of the statements and what actually I am allowed to say or do what should I do? Considering what I have seen during my two weeks in custody, there was nothing to convince that rights of the accused person are considered. Also, although I did most of my question answering in Japanese at both the prosecutor and police questioning I was not allowed to make comments when the Japanese statement was read but only after I was translated to me in English. This time the translator was particularly bad, so that I had to correct her and ask for clarifications several times. Again, I was wondering if I am being out of line here, but I could not help but to feel frustrated as I felt I was being denied my rights of having the statement written according to what I have actually said and not as somewhat incorrect summarization. For example, I previously said that I believe that my neighbor was wearing glasses but the actual statement said that he was wearing classes every time. Also, during the questioning I said that I met with my girlfriend on the night of 2001/10/15 but was not sure of the time and that it was probably after the time of the crime. As I found out from the lawyer I was probably working or just going home from work at the time of the crime. Nonetheless, the final statement says that I was with my girlfriend at the time of the crime and therefore I could not commit the crime. Clearly this is a discrepancy, but I only realized it after I was reviewing the statement to myself after the questioning was over. Instead of getting the right phrasing of the statement, I had to weigh the possible consequences of not signing or signing the statement as it is. I reasoned that I am probably better off if I do sign the statement as it is since the most important statement -- that I did not commit the crime -- is in it. After I signed the statement, I was told that the decision on my case will be made by the day after and that no decision was available at this time. .

Having been told such a thing, I could not help but think that I was getting charged. If all this time was not sufficient to prove my innocence, I am getting charged and regardless of whether I get convicted I am looking at at least five to six months more in prison. Two months before the trial and about three to four months of trial since testimonies of all involved are usually heard in one month intervals. Not very comforting was the fact that there just cannot be any evidence that would be sufficient to convince me. .

The next day, I was told nothing until about 3PM. At 3PM I was informed by the guard that I should collect my stuff for I would be released that day. I felt greatly relieved that after all this time I was finally going to go home. After going through a long procedure to get all my articles brought to the precinct back I was finally released around 7PM on the 2002/07/26 some nineteen days after my arrest. I was lucky I guess that the actual last day of my extension would fall on sunday (2000/07/28) so I was released a bit early. When I was released I did not get any explanation or apology. I tried to get some form saying that I was in custody for the period from 2002/07/07 to 2002/07/26 but I was told that no such papers are issued. That is I was in custody for almost twenty days but I have no hard proof to show for it. I was afraid that I would have problems in school or otherwise and that it would be nice to have something to show for this time period. .

Also the fact that I did not even get an apology from the police or from the prosecutor shocked me. As Japan claims to be a developed country, I would expect that it should not allow innocent citizens (domestic or foreign) to be arrested and held without sufficient evidence. And if there is a mistake, the perpetrators should apologize and justify the situation. Instead I heard nothing, not even the cold "sorry" which you get when you bump into somebody on the street. After talking to my lawyer, I realized that evidence will not be released so I will never know whether the picture that was identified was really my picture and whether it mandated my arrest. I am not even sure whether I am released with all the suspicion being cleared or just since they did not get enough evidence to put me away "this time around." .

Regardless of whether there was initial evidence that would implicate me in the case, I have to wonder was it really necessary to keep me in custody for the whole time when it became evident early on (or at least it should have become evident) that I am not using drugs and have nothing in common with my neighbor instead of the fact that he is my neighbor. Finally, should I not expect at least some kind of a formal apology if not monetary reparation for the stress I have bared during the almost twenty days of being treated as a criminal. Does such judicial procedure really comply with Japanese law or is it just a form of abuse of the law by the prosecutor office and the police? Given that I am a reasonably established Japanese-speaking foreigner in Japan with a position at a famous university and funding from the Japanese government itself, I can only wonder what treatment foreigners with lesser credibility might get during a judicial proceeding. Are we really all considered criminals until proven innocent?

CONTACT: Kontakt zu meinem Freund (wird weitergeleitet) - Comments, questions can be sent to my friend through me

Zurück auf die Startseite