Tuesday, June 12, 2012

Japan Today: 1,324 Fukushima citizens file criminal complaint against TEPCO, gov't


Japan Today Jun. 12, 2012 -http://www.japantoday.com/category/crime/view/over-1300-fukushima-citizens-file-criminal-complaint-against-tepco

[Excerpt] "More than 1,300 residents of Fukushima Prefecture have filed a criminal complaint against 33 named Tokyo Electric Power Co (TEPCO) executives and the Japanese government in connection with the disaster at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant last year.

The complaint was filed Monday by 1,324 citizens at the Fukushima prosecutors’ office, TBS reported. The bill of indictment formally accuses members of TEPCO and the government’s Nuclear Safety Commission of professional negligence resulting in injury or death.

The commission is accused of negligence in regard to its responsibility to take adequate safety precautions at the Fukushima plant. . . ."

[end excerpt]

read entire article linked above.

In an era of legally and litigation-defined "justice," the citizens of Fukushima have little recourse other than legal action.

Although a  criminal suit is appropriate, there can never be adequate restitution or compensation to the citizens of Fukushima and planet earth for the ongoing destruction of the atmosphere and Pacific Ocean as a result of this mega-catastrophe.

Ulrich Beck, a sociologist of risk, was interviewed about the Fukushima catastrophe in July of 2011. Ulrich described the Fukushima nuclear event as a “catastrophe” that “is unlimited in space, time and the social dimension. It's the new kind of risk.”  

When asked how such risks are produced, Beck responded: “Risks depend on decision making. The risk depends on the process of modernization. And they're produced with technological innovations and investment.” 

Beck denied that the disaster could have resulted simply from unforeseeable natural catastrophes:
 

[excerpt] "the decision to build an atomic industry in the area of an earthquake is a political decision; it's not done by nature. It's a political decision, which has to be justified in the public and which has been taken by parliament, by businesses and so on. . . . I think industries try to define it as something which has been done by nature. But they don't realize that we are living in an age where the decision making is the primary background for these kinds of catastrophes. 
I think it's very important to realize this because modernity, or even what you could say is the victory of modernity, produces more and more uncontrollable consequences.
 

Beck observes that with Fukushima and other modern risks stemming from human decision making “we have a system of organized irresponsibility: Nobody really is responsible for those consequences. We have a system of organized irresponsibility, and this system has to be changed.” 

Beck notes that the denial of responsibility—the system of organized irresponsibility—requires the populace and the state to assume costs of disasters. 


In this important sense, Beck points out, “And actually, this is a contradiction to capitalism and the market economy. We have the same discussion actually in relation to the banking system; it's quite similar. Actually, the banks should take care of possible crises, and maybe they should have an insurance principle as well. But they don't, so actually the state has to take it. This is socialism; this is state socialism.
 

Beck cited Hirohito Ohno “Interview/ Ulrich Beck: System of Organized Irresponsibility Behind the Fukushima Crisis,” Asahi (2011, July 7): http://www.asahi.com/english/TKY201107060307.html


No comments:

Post a Comment