Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s administration has again shown blatant disregard for questions from members of the Diet, which serves as the watchdog to monitor the government’s behavior as the representative of the people.

The administration has made an outrageously defiant move to dodge answering allegations concerning an annual cherry blossom-viewing event hosted by the prime minister.

A meeting of senior members of the Lower House Cabinet Committee was held on Dec. 17 over opposition questions about the event even though the extraordinary Diet session ended earlier in the month. The government offered no meaningful answers to the questions, submitted jointly by opposition parties in an attempt to hold the administration accountable for the allegations made against it.

The Abe administration’s action is a clear sign that it has absolutely no intention of making serious efforts to uncover the truth.

One of the questions concerns an invitation to the cherry blossom event sent to the former chairman of Japan Life, a bankrupt company under investigation by police for alleged fraudulent rental business operations. A reception slip that accompanied the letter bore the number 60, which is believed to indicate the category of invitations made on the basis of recommendations from Abe.

Asked what the number meant, the government said there was no need to conduct an investigation to find the answer. The government also refused to question the officials in charge of the matter over the issue, saying it was unnecessary.

It has been revealed that the list of invitees for this year’s event was run through a large shredder about one hour after a Japanese Communist Party lawmaker demanded official documents concerning the event for questions at the Diet.

Digital data about the invited guests has also been destroyed. When the data was deleted is important for determining whether the shredding of the list was a deliberate attempt to cover up inconvenient facts.

While acknowledging that it is practically possible to check the computer’s history file to identify the date of the data deletion, the government refused to do so, saying it has obtained a rough idea about the date through questioning the official in charge.

The government made a similarly insincere response to the opposition demand for information concerning public expenses for the attendance of Abe’s wife, Akie, at the event, such as whether a daily allowance was paid to her or whether a government vehicle was used.

The government said that it was “difficult” to answer these questions because the intentions of the questions were unclear. The reply only suggests that the government has no intention of answering such questions in the first place.

At the root of the government’s behavior is undoubtedly Abe’s tendency to dodge as much as possible his responsibility to explain the allegations to the public.

In his speech last week, Abe offered “deep apologies” for the fact that the Diet has been forced to spend much time during the past three years or so dealing with issues that do not concern policies.

He cited allegations concerning the dubious sale of state-owned land to Moritomo Gakuen, an Osaka-based school operator linked to Abe’s wife, the government’s decision to allow the Kake Educational Institution, run by a close friend of Abe, to open a new veterinary medicine faculty and problems behind faulty statistics compiled by the labor ministry as well as the cherry blossom-viewing party.

His “apologies,” however, sound hollow and insincere given that he is to blame for the situation, which has been caused by his failure to offer convincing answers to related questions and allegations.

As for the Moritomo scandal, which concerned the sale of state-owned land to the educational institution at a questionable discount based on a special provision of the sales contract, the Osaka High Court ruled on Dec. 17 that the central government acted illegally in refusing to disclose these pieces of information. The ruling took the earlier lower court decision one step further.

The Osaka District Court had earlier ruled that the sales price had to be disclosed but declared that not disclosing the special provision was not illegal.

The administration’s responses to questions and allegations concerning the cherry blossom event only indicate that there has been no change in its proclivity to conceal inconvenient information.

If Abe really wants the Diet to engage in constructive debate on policy issues during the regular session next year, he first needs to offer honest and straightforward answers to questions related to the sakura event by, for example, agreeing to attend a committee session while the Diet is closed.

--The Asahi Shimbun, Dec. 19