The people's trial that began in the wake of the Itaewon accident - The horror of a country where all citizens think they are jurors
2022-11-07
Category:South Korea
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
Is President Yoon responsible for the Itaewon accident?
It appears that a candlelight demonstration was held in Itaewon, Seoul on Halloween in the name of commemorating the victims. South Korea is apparently the country of demonstrations, but organizers said ``50,000 people gathered.'' Police estimate the number of participants to be 9,000. The purpose seems to be to hold the current President Yoon's administration responsible for the Itaewon accident and demand his resignation.
A surprising public opinion poll was conducted
A public opinion poll was conducted, and found that the government was responsible for the Itaewon disaster.73.1% said it was responsible, 23.3% said it was not responsible, and 53% said it was extremely responsible. Considering whether the decision should be based on public opinion polls in the first place, I wonder if South Korea's famous all-citizen jury trial system has started again. In the first place, it must be said that he is in a state of cessation of thinking, meaning that he does not have the composure to analyze the responsibility and causes of the problem.
Read it together
In response to the Itaewon Halloween accident in South Korea, President Yoon prioritizes the settlement of the accident as a matter of national policy - The settlement of the accident is a matter of [Contents]
A barren argument if it comes down to civic consciousness
The same idea as China will not solve the problem
Could the accident have been prevented?
Sufficient predictability
There was a way to prevent the accident
Halloween in Shibuya under police guard
DJ Police in action
Closing accidents is a matter of course
After the Halloween accident in Itaewon, South Korea, there seems to be a lot of public opinion in South Korea. It seems that there are opinions on social media such as ``It's a problem with young people's manners,'' and ``Let's raise citizen awareness.'' There was even an opinion that there was a person who pushed from behind, and that person should be identified. A crowd accident is when everyone is pushed from behind.
This is exactly the same as the summary of the Shanghai accident. In the case of the Shanghai Bund accident, the conclusion was to raise public awareness in China. Of course, the issue of public awareness is not irrelevant. If you can't walk in line and keep your turn, it will easily lead to crowd accidents. But how do you explain the mass accident that occurred in Japan, which is said to be the most lined up in the world? No matter how much you raise your awareness, accidents still happen.
Minister of Public Administration and Safety Lee Sang-min appears to have become a controversial issue when he said, “The problem could not have been resolved by deploying police and firefighters in advance.” CNN and the Washington Post seem to point to problems with police security and operations. This is the correct answer. It's clear that the Chief of Administration and Safety himself is not aware of the problem, even after the catastrophe of that magnitude.
In the trial for the pedestrian bridge accident at the Akashi Fireworks Festival, the question was whether it was predictable and whether the accident could have been prevented. As for predictability, it was clear to everyone that an event would be held and many people would gather. It is said that the street where the accident happened in Seoul was also a place where many people could easily gather. In other words, it can be said that there was foreseeability .
As for whether or not the accident could have been prevented, the Akashi trial explained the physical mechanism that causes a shogi overthrow. It was proven that 13 to 15 people per square meter were densely packed on the pedestrian bridge. It was also proved that the pressure concentrates on the corners and edges of the passage. In other words, it can be concluded that there is a high possibility that fatal accidents caused by knocking down shogi would not have occurred if, at the very least, less than 5 people per square meter were arranged and spaces were created at both ends of the aisles. Humans don't die from being pushed from behind.
Only the police or security guards assigned to guard the event can direct traffic. On this day, 200 police officers were mobilized in South Korea to guard Halloween, which means the accident was preventable. The method is to secure space at both ends, and once a certain group of people pass through, they will be regulated, and after opening the space, the next group will be allowed to walk.
120,000 people visited Shibuya at its peak for Halloween last night. Many police officers are conducting walking guidance. On top of a large police vehicle, a police officer makes an announcement over a loudspeaker and gives instructions to pedestrians. This is installed in several places in the shopping district of Shibuya, and it monitors whether there are too many crowds from above and whether there are any troubles.
The police officers who make this announcement are called "DJ police" and are familiar to young people. The announcements are made with humor, and even young people who do not listen to instructions when they are in a group will listen to funny police officers. In 2013, one male and one female police officer were awarded the Chief Police Officer's Award for this novel method of guarding against crowds.
Even if you watch the video of the accident in Itaewon, you can't see the police in the middle of the street.there is almost no police officer's walk near the entrance. President Yoon said, ``The top priority of national affairs is to settle the accident and respond to it.'' This is a matter of course. Transport the injured to the hospital, and if the street where the accident occurred returns to its original state, the accident will be settled. What is necessary is to investigate the cause and formulate specific measures to prevent recurrence
The police is under administrative jurisdiction and is under the jurisdiction of the prefectural police
Japan's police force is handled by the National Police Agency, which has administrative jurisdiction. The National Police Agency will be positioned as a special organization within the Public Safety Commission, which is an external bureau of the Cabinet. Rather than directing and supervising the National Police Agency on individual cases, the Public Safety Commission sets general policies and supervises whether they are being operated appropriately.
As it is an administrative organ, the main body of work lies with local governments, and prefectural police are responsible for accidents and incidents that occur under their jurisdiction. Hyogo Prefectural Police was held responsible for the Akashi fireworks display accident, and Nara Prefectural Police was held responsible for Abe's assassination.
Is the president in charge of Halloween?
They seem to be claiming that the president is responsible for the Itaewon accident, but that is not the case at all under Japanese law. What about Korean law? Normally, responsibility should be assumed by the person in charge, but does this mean that President Yoon should grasp the details of the security system and issue instructions regarding Halloween security? Or should we have decided by presidential order that this is how we should enjoy the Halloween festival?
I'm participating in the ranking.Please click and cheer for me.
[related article]
South Korean delegation insists on 'efforts from both countries' - Japan is fulfilling all its promises - South Korea is the one who is not making enough efforts
South Korea says efforts from both Japan and South Korea are necessary
Intentions of both countries passing each other
What is the destination that Korea envisions?
If we misunderstand the Korean issue, the government will tilt
Japan has already apologized many times
Japan fulfills all commitments
What does the effort of both countries mean?
While the recent South Korean delegation's visit to Japan has been reported as if the two countries have once again returned to the direction of improving Japan-Korea relations, the response of the Japanese government, including the prime minister, has been criticized. The South Korean side is keen to improve Japan-Korea relations, and as a result, interviews with the current prime minister, former prime minister, and other ministers were held. The most important point is that a gap that cannot be filled has been identified.
The rift is that while Japan is demanding that South Korea "fulfill its commitments," South Korea has consistently stated that "efforts from both sides are needed." This means that South Korea will not make unilateral concessions. More specifically, before the presidential election, President-elect Yoon Seok-Yeol met with Lee Yong-soo, a self-proclaimed representative of former comfort women, and said, ``We must demand an apology from Japan.'' has promised that he will receive it. That's probably what he's saying.
What kind of efforts does South Korea want from Japan? For example, is the Japanese Prime Minister going to South Korea, meeting with former comfort women, apologizing, and reporting the moving scene as an attempt to settle the matter? However, if South Korea's next government does not understand that this is an unlikely future, improving relations seems a long way off.
If Prime Minister Kishida were to do something like that, the Kishida administration would surely collapse, and even in this meeting with the parliamentary group, there are voices calling for Kishida to be removed from the position of prime minister. There are even voices saying that they will not vote for the Liberal Democratic Party in the next House of Councilors election. Reasons for this include the forced labor judgment and the abrogation of the Japan-Korea comfort women agreement.
Regarding the South Korean delegation's visit to Japan, since it was a group of parliamentarians before the inauguration of the new South Korean government, there were many opinions that Japan should also conduct the visit within the framework of parliamentary exchanges and that the government should not deal with it.
The comfort women agreement states, ``This is an issue that has deeply damaged the honor and dignity of many women, and from this perspective, the Japanese government is acutely aware of its responsibility.'' I would like to express my heartfelt apologies and remorse to the people of... Yun Seok-Yeol seems to think that since he has expressed his apology, it would be okay to apologize face-to-face. However, the agreement states, ``As the Japanese government declares the above and steadily implements the measures in (2) above (establishment of a foundation), this announcement will ensure that this issue will be finalized and irreversible.'' to make sure it is resolved."
The 1965 Claims Agreement, including the issue of forced labor, was already resolved. Japan is simply asking South Korea to faithfully implement these agreements. Japan has fulfilled all of its responsibilities, so all that remains is for South Korea to fulfill its own responsibilities. In other words, it is no longer an issue for both countries to make efforts.
Jeong Jin-seok, head of the South Korean delegation, claps his hands together and says that only by joining hands like this can relations be improved. Hearing these words, I can't help but think that South Korea's next new government may not even understand what the current situation is. This is because the efforts of these two countries resulted in the Claims Agreement in 1965, the Japan-South Korea Joint Declaration in 1998, and the Comfort Women Agreement in 2015, which is exactly the kind of hand-to-hand situation that Chung described. It is South Korea that unilaterally abolished these . Japan must not take a step back from this line.
If we look at Japan-South Korea relations after the restoration of diplomatic relations, South Korea has completely torn up all previous agreements. Is the next agreement really necessary?
The South Korean government is responsible for the Korean government's refusal to allow its nationals to repatriate - Japan protected them out of human rights considerations.
The issue of forced labor and the issue of residents in Japan are related. Conscription on the Korean Peninsula took place from August 1944 until the end of the war the following year. Until then, Koreans on the Korean peninsula were not subject to conscription or conscription. Employment at Japanese companies is highly sought after, and despite being conscripted, Mitsubishi Mining received seven times as many applications as recruitment.
Normally, those living in Japan would be forced to leave because they are foreigners, but the reason why this is not the case is because of the 1965 Japan-Korea Status of Forces Agreement. The South Korean government at the time received a huge amount of aid, but refused to allow its citizens to return home. Since all Koreans in Japan were believed to be slave laborers who had been forcibly taken away from Japan, it would have been inconvenient for a large number of people who had experienced a different reality to return home. Japan restored diplomatic relations out of human rights considerations and guaranteed the Koreans' status in Japan.
As was made clear in the Gunkanjima issue, the recruitment at that time was legal recruitment under ILO standards. In terms of human rights issues, it lies with the South Korean government, which has refused to allow large numbers of its own citizens to return and has discarded them. That is a human rights issue. And what is being made a fuss about all this is the issue of conscripted labor.
severance of diplomatic relations betwee There are many people in both Japan and South Korea calling for a break in diplomatic relations, but I thought that a break in diplomatic relations between Japan and South Korea should be expected from the beginning after the recruitment ruling and the exclusion of White countries.Former Prime Minister Abe already expressed his opinion on July 3, 2019, that the exclusion of White Country was not retaliation for the recruitment ruling, but a failure to keep his promise between countries.The 1965 Agreement is an agreement on claims in the treaty in which Japan and South Korea restored diplomatic relations.Abolition of this agreement is a loss of the premise of diplomatic relations, and it is obvious that diplomatic relations will break off.
Now, considering the specific problems of breaking off diplomatic relations at the private level, the video link I posted is a couple of Japanese and Taiwanese Youtuber.If private marriage is allowed, private economic activities are allowed.Strategic materials and military-related products that must be negotiated between governments will be regulated.It would be a substantial break in diplomatic relations if we could not communicate with each other at the opening ceremony of the Tokyo Olympics.
On the other hand, countries without diplomatic relations have no further interests and do not lead to war.It is not the break of diplomatic relations that is in danger, but the travel ban order.Japan has a special relationship called Taiwan.The lack of intergovernmental exchanges has never been a problem at the private level.
His Majesty the Emperor visited Saipan
In 2005, the Emperor and Empress visited Saipan to pay their respects to the war dead.In response, a protest demonstration was held by a Korean group.It seems to be the idea that the Emperor's memorial service for the war dead is the revival of militarism.
Angered by the movement, Saipan residents shouted, "If Koreans protest against the Emperor, let's boycott Korean companies," and John Blanco urged native Chamoros and Carolina residents to boycott Korean companies if Koreans hold scheduled protests next Tuesday.Nevertheless, the Saipan Korean Association spread out banners and staged a demonstration demanding an apology from the Emperor.
The Japanese probably don't understand the idea that visiting the memorial is the revival of militarism.It was the same for Saipans.
An old Chamorro woman rose to her feet."How rude of the Emperor to come to the memorial service!I won't forgive you!" he exasperated, "You guys get out of Saipan."Don't do anything selfish on our island," he told local residents and the media one after another.As a result, many Chamoros supported the demonstration, and it developed into a huge demonstration to welcome the Emperor.
It was the 60th anniversary of the end of World War II, when the Emperor and Empress visited Saipan with a warm welcome on June 27th and 28th.
Korea justifies anti-Japanese demonstrations regardless of where they are.Saipan residents got angry at this and developed into a welcome demonstration for the Emperor.
Candidate Lee Jae - myung said that America was to blame for the division of the Korean peninsula - a victim mentality lacking in historical understanding.
What is this person saying? South Korean presidential candidate Lee Jae-myung told U.S. Senator Jon Ossoff that the Korean peninsula was divided without Japan being divided. It is America's fault that the Korean peninsula was divided into north and south. On top of that, it's a statement that says Japan should have been divided.
Losing a war does not always result in division. The former East and West Germany was divided into East and West by the socialist Soviet Union and liberal countries. Since the Soviet Union was largely responsible for Germany's defeat, the Soviet Union gained control of Eastern Europe, and Germany itself was divided into East and West. In multilateral wars, when the victorious nations were unable to come to terms on their merits and interests, the method of partition was adopted. Germany is a perfect example.
So what about Japan? Although it is still a multilateral war, Japan has won against all Western countries except the United States. Only America lost. The Soviet Union had nothing to do with the Japan-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact. The Soviet Union entered the war on August 9, 1945, just before the end of the war. How could the Soviet Union claim its interests against the United States?
So why did the Soviet Union claim interests in the Korean Peninsula? This is said to have been determined by the Yalta Secret Treaty, which determined the division along the 38th parallel. The question is at what point in time should a return to the status quo be made, based on the principle of restoration to its original state in post-war settlements. At the Yalta Conference, Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin discussed how to deal with the aftermath of World War II.
The fact that the San Francisco Peace Treaty recognized the return of Taiwan dates back to the Sino-Japanese War. On the Korean Peninsula, Gojong, the Emperor of the Korean Empire, negotiated with Russia to sell the interests of the Korean Peninsula. The Soviet Union built the transcontinental railroad and began colonizing East Asia. The theory is that if Japan had not interfered in the Russo-Japanese War, the Korean Peninsula would have belonged to the Soviet Union. In other words, they are claiming rights dating back to before the Russo-Japanese War.
Why is present-day South Korea a democratic country? This is based on the premise that the Korean Peninsula belonged to Japan, and it was the United States that forced Japan into defeat, so the United States claimed its rights. Therefore, Korea came under the control of GHQ. Based on this premise, the 38th parallel was established as a compromise line with the Soviet Union, dividing the country into north and south.