N0.111 Judgment of criminal trial of TEPCO Fukushima nuclear power plant accident. “We are not responsible because it is unexpected,” was affirmed. ・・・Theme label: Absence of the Japanese government's crisis management capabilities. It will be fatal.


Due to the tsunami of the Great East Japan Earthquake, TEPCO's reactor control facility at the Fukushima No. 2 nuclear power plant was destroyed. As a result, the out of control reactor fell into meltdown, causing radioactive contamination in the surrounding area.
In this accident, criminal trials against TEPCO's three CEOs at the time were disputed. The Tokyo District Court ruled the innocence of these three people.

This nuclear accident was highly criticized internationally at the time of the outbreak. The management was first publicly affirmed, insisting that "We are not responsible for this accident because of an unexpected cause."

“We are not responsible because it is not expected.” This decision affirmed this.

The issue at the trial was whether the management at that time could or could not expect the tsunami damage.
Criminal liability as negligence is required for the fact that tsunami damage could be predicted but the emergency shutdown of the reactor was not taken.
The plaintiff argued, “Judging from past cases, tsunami damage could be expected.”
The defendant refuted that "the tsunami damage could not have been predicted based on judgments from past cases."

The true meaning of this decision will not be understood by the Japanese government, the Japanese media, or the Japanese experts.
Japanese people will not understand at all how the judgment will be evaluated by the international community. It may not be understood in the future.

In Japanese society, the concept of “unlimited liability” may not exist.
And this is what the international community is paying attention to.

I have heard that Lloyds ship insurance in the UK is guaranteed on the principle of unlimited liability.
The responsibility of the national chief executive will be unlimited.
Reactor accidents cause serious social and global damage. The responsibility of the chief officer of an organization that owns such equipment is also unlimited liability.

It doesn't matter whether this nuclear accident could be anticipated in advance or not. The fact that the nuclear accident occurred itself is a problem.
The accident that caused the nuclear accident itself becomes the negligence of the chief officer.
This is the unlimited responsibility of the chief executive.

The international community will recognize this.
So, in this trial, the international community would conclude when the issue was "whether the managers at that time could or could not assume the tsunami."
“The Japanese leaders do not understand unlimited liability,” the international community would have concluded.

The international community will conclude that “Japanese leaders have no intelligence”.
I think that the international community will choose an action based on the premise that "Japanese leaders do not have intelligence."
I dare to say this.

I never say, "Japanese leaders are causing intelligence collapse." If it says "I have an intelligence collapse", it means that intelligence existed before it collapsed.
Then, even after intelligence collapse, traces of intelligence may remain.
If that is the case, there is a possibility of having a crisis consciousness against "unexpected".
If there is no intelligence from the beginning, there is no possibility of getting a sense of crisis against “unexpected”.

If the Japanese government was aware of “infinite liability,” the recent power outage in Chiba Prefecture could have avoided the catastrophe that would become apparent.
A leader who recognizes “unlimited responsibility” will recognize that “I do not know where the unexpected lurks”.
I don't know when a catastrophe will be caused by something I didn't expect.
The leader who recognizes “unlimited responsibility” always assumes the existence of an unexpected cause and continues to sharpen his senses.

If the Japanese government was aware of “infinite liability”, it would have responded with a quick initial action.
A 3-day power outage continued throughout Chiba Prefecture. This should have caused a fatal situation.
For example, if mass deaths of livestock were occurring, the livestock carcasses could not handle corruption and would cause outbreaks of infectious diseases.
Since the communication method was interrupted, the catastrophe was not communicated outside Chiba Prefecture.

The current Japanese government is trying to respond only to what was anticipated in advance.




TOP Article

コメント

このブログの人気の投稿

No.012 Iran's President Rouhani has officially stated that it will enrich uranium beyond the provisions of the nuclear agreement. Participants in the nuclear agreement must be prepared to make decisions. Only the enrichment of uranium that allows nuclear weapons production must be blocked. ・・・ Theme label: A second Islamic state will be born in destroyed Iran Category label: Iran

NO.095 Will Iran choose nuclear weapons development? ・・・ Theme label: Dar al-Islam constructed by Saudi Aramco's 200 trillion yen money creation. Category label: Macroeconomics, Religious Sociology, Jihad, Iran

NO.048 Facebook's cryptocurrency Libra: Banknotes also evolved from gold deposit certificates initially issued by gold depositors. Banknotes that are currently in circulation around the world were also first deposit certificates issued by private businesses. , ・・・ Theme label: Asset owners. We propose a charitable enterprise for the Great Depression.What kind of world is GAFA looking at? Category label: Macroeconomics