When Nick was arrested, he was never clearly informed of that fact, was never informed of his rights such as the right to remain silent. He was held in custody for 23 days during which time was not allowed to contact any lawyer. He was made to sign statements written in Japanese, a language he does not understand. The police maintain that the statements, Nickfs confession, were read back to him in English via a translator and that Nick acknowledged the accuracy of the statements. However, as is customary with all Japanese police investigations, these interrogation sessions were never recorded on audio or video tape. Later, when Nick read the written translation of these statements provided by his lawyer, he realized for the first time that they were not at all an accurate account of what he had said during the interrogations.

During the trial at the Tokyo District Court, Nick's defense attorney requested that the facts of the Belgian case be admitted as evidence. However, presiding Judge Kenji Kadoya refused this motion at the request of the prosecution. On June 12, 2003, Judge Kadoya sentenced Nick to 14 years in prison and five million yen in fine, largely on the basis of the statements taken during the police interrogations. Nick and his defense team appealed immediately.

The first appeals hearing took place on March 23, 2004 at the Tokyo High Court. The seventh hearing just took place today. Among the key issues at the appeals trial are the appropriateness of the procedures taken by customs officers and the police officers at the initial stages of investigations and the quality of translation during the police interrogations and the District Court hearings.

Severe problems arose due to poor quality of interpretation, such as their right to legal counsel not being accurately informed and their answers not matching the questions, giving the investigators --and jurors later-- an impression that they were not being honest.

During the trial, the defendants requested for what they thought was their strongest evidence to prove innocence: to call the two other Japanese tourists and the tour guide in Kuala Lumpur as witness to substantiate their claim that their original suitcases were stolen. The judge ruled that it was not necessary. On the other hand, the prosecution had more than 100 witnesses to testify against them. The defendants were never given any chance to take the stand to tell their side of the story. At times, they were unable to follow the court proceedings due to sub-standard level of interpretation which was sometimes only a summary of what was said in court. In the end, jury found all five guilty and four of them were sentenced to 15 years, one was sentenced to 25 (later reduced to 20) years in prison.

In November 2002, after serving over 10 years in prison, four of them were released on parole and were immediately deported to Japan. One of them is Mr. Masahiro Katsuno, whose youngest brother is still serving his sentence in Australia. Prior to this, in September 1998, the four of them submitted an individual communication to United Nations Human Rights Committee in Geneva to urge the Committee to give recommendations to the Australian government to reopen their case. They were the first Japanese citizens to complain to the Committee. The Commission announced their decision in August 2004, advising the Australian government to review their case. The government, in turn, argued against this decision. Now the four and their defense team are working on the counterargument.

For further information, contact: info@melbosaka.com