Lawyers must not use ``national electricity''-A lawyer who was prohibited from connecting his computer to the power supply in the court by order of the presiding judge said, Infringement of the right to receive assistance from Now that IT tools are being introduced to courts, it is a surprising disposition that can be said to go against the times.
September 27, just after 1:30 p.m., right before the fourth round of pre-trial arrangement proceedings for the defendant, who was indicted for smuggling stimulants in Court No. 403 of the Yokohama District Court and denied the charges, presiding judge Taro Kageyama. ordered:
"Because it's national electricity, it may be private or work, but please use your own electricity. Courts around the country do the same. Using electricity for pre-trial arrangement procedures is I think it's out of line."
Presiding Judge Kageyama has been reluctant to allow defense attorneys to use the power supply in the courtroom since the second round of pre-trial arrangement procedures. After the fourth time, it was finally officially banned.
Lawyer Takano filed an objection after confirming that it was a formal court disposition. However, presiding judge Kageyama refused, saying that he would dismiss the objection, so Takano filed an objection to the Tokyo High Court.
Mr. Takano, who has a wealth of experience in criminal cases, has worked as a defense attorney in courts all over the country. In court, it is common practice to use a laptop computer by plugging the power cord into the power strip in the attorney's seat, and so far no complaint has been filed in any court. Even at the same Yokohama District Court, it is said that the power supply could be used without incident in the pre-trial arrangement procedure of the case that another presiding judge was in charge of.
Attorney Takano converts not only documents and evidence from the defense side, but also documents from the prosecution side, disclosed evidence, and court decisions into pdf files and manages them on a computer. A computer is now an essential tool. The use of a computer is indispensable for checking documents and documents and taking notes in the pre-trial arrangement procedure, in which the court decides whether or not to accept evidence and organizes the claims of both parties.
Even when I leave the house with a full charge in the morning, there are many times when I have to deal with multiple lawsuits, and I keep using my laptop almost all day, so the battery doesn't last until I get back to the office. .
Also, Attorney Takano brings a printer into the court, prints the necessary documents, and shows them to the witnesses for questioning. Of course, electricity is also required to operate the printer.
Attorney Takano lamented this disposition.
“We are not doing private business in court. I was astonished."
Unlike the days when criminal trials were conducted using only paper documents, IT systems have recently been introduced to criminal trials.
In such an era, it seems quite anachronistic to not allow defense attorneys to use power in the courtroom. From the standpoint of the same lawyer, how does this incident look?
On SNS, lawyers and other people are surprised at the order to prohibit the use of "national electricity", such as "What era are you talking about?" and "Is the presiding judge insane?" It's an unusual disposition, but it doesn't seem to be without precedent.
According to the blog of Shigehiro Kanaoka, a lawyer from the Aichi Bar Association, there was once a presiding judge in the Nagoya District Court who prohibited defense attorneys from using power sources. In that court, it seemed to be a precaution to put packing tape on the outlet to make it unusable. However, when the presiding judge was transferred, the packing tape was peeled off, and it seems that it became possible to use it in the courtroom of the same district court.
Lawyer Sadato Goto (Osaka Bar Association), who has a lot of experience as a criminal defense attorney like Takano, says that the ban on the use of electricity does not reflect the current state of criminal trials. , said.
"In the past, witness examinations took time, such as pulling out paper evidence and showing it to the witness, showing the copy to the judge or prosecutor, checking it, and making him write it down. Now it takes time. It is also common to show the evidence from the defense attorney's computer to the judge's or prosecutor's monitor, and have the witnesses write notes using a document camera.This is much more efficient in terms of time. , the electricity bill should have been factored into the court's cost."
How should we view this disposition from a legal point of view? I asked a criminal procedure law expert for his opinion.
Kinki University Professor Norio Tsujimoto (Code of Criminal Procedure) commented, "Presiding Judge Kageyama may be looking at defense attorneys in criminal cases as if they were representatives in civil cases. Isn't there?" he asks.
"However, according to the Japanese legal system such as the Constitution and the view of the courts so far, defense attorneys in criminal cases play a public role, and that role has been respected. However, it is not possible to open an office without an attorney.In this day and age, it is natural for an attorney to use a computer in court.The presiding judge who criticizes the use of electricity may not understand the role of an attorney correctly. Isn't there
Tsukasa Saito, Ryukoku University (Code of Criminal Procedure) also objects to the ban on the use of power sources.
"The basis of a criminal trial is to conduct a fair trial in a facility called a court. It is the government's duty to prepare an environment in which a smooth trial can be held in that facility. We can't go to court without it (providing electricity) is a necessary infrastructure.
I also wonder if the presiding judge has the power to ban the use of electricity. Can the presiding judge really be the manager of the court's electricity?"
What does this case look like to someone who has experience as a judge?
"Sometimes there are weird judges who lead cases like this. It's annoying."
Lawyer Akira Kidani, former Chief Judge of the Tokyo High Court, laments.
"People who can't get a lawyer will have a court-appointed lawyer. Does this presiding judge say that the activities of the court-appointed lawyer are also 'private'? This case (stimulant drug smuggling) , "Necessary defense" means that a trial cannot be opened without a defense lawyer.A defense lawyer is indispensable and a public presence in a trial.The defense lawyer has a computer for defense activities It is not 'private use' to use electricity."
Lawyer Yoshiki Yamaura, who served as a judge at the Supreme Court, points out that the judges do not understand the activities of lawyers.
"Judges only need to take the elevator from the judge's room to appear in court, and the records are prepared by the clerk. You don't understand the situation of lawyers who go to multiple courts.
After that, I advise the court as follows.
"Criminal trials are ``a good game that cannot be played unless three people (including defense attorneys) are present.'' That's just right. I think that the people's trust in the court can be gained only by responding in this way."
Lastly, we asked Takao Nakayama, Attorney-at-Law, a former chief justice of the Fukuoka High Court.
"The electricity bill is paid by the court, so (using a defense attorney) can be said to be a convenience in theory. Therefore, the court's discretion is to consider the need and allow it within a reasonable range. However, ordinary courts (for use in defense) should respond with a broader view of necessity and rationality, and computers are now comparable (in courts) to traditional paper and pencil. When a lawyer's pencil breaks, I don't think there are many judges who would refuse to borrow the court's pencil.
During his time as a judge, Mr. Nakayama had brought a personal computer to the judge's seat in court from an early stage.
"Since future courts will be more and more ITized, I think it would be better to discuss (the use of electricity by defense attorneys) here."
It may be just electricity, but it is electricity. Wouldn't it be a problem if the presiding judge could or could not use defense counsel at his discretion?
Although I have not listened to Presiding Judge Kageyama's arguments, I will refrain from making a categorical assessment, but I cannot help but feel something authoritarian about this response. We are watching what the Tokyo High Court will decide.