Prime Minister’s Office

The Cabinet alone could decide on the state funeral for former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. This conclusion was reached during discussion held from July 12 to 14, 2022. Bureaucrats from the Prime Minister’s Office, including the Cabinet Secretariat and Cabinet Office, visited the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, also known as the “guardian of the law.”

The key to the “State Funeral Document Concealment Trial” is whether the records of these three days can be unearthed. The defendant, the government, claims that they “did not keep records in the first place or discarded them.” The plaintiff, Tansa, argues that “it is impossible not to keep records of such important discussions or to discard them.”

Three oral arguments have been held so far at the Tokyo District Court.

What exactly happened during the three days of discussions? Presiding Judge Kenji Shinoda repeatedly asked the government for an explanation, but the government refused to give a proper response. When, who, and what kind of discussion took place? During the third oral argument, Presiding Judge Shinoda even urged the parties to be mindful of the “5W1H.”

To what extent will the government comply with Presiding Judge Shinoda’s instructions?

The fourth oral argument will be held on October 9. The government has submitted a brief outlining the three-day discussion, along with reports from four bureaucrats who participated in the discussion.

The names of the four bureaucrats, their positions at the time and now

The Prime Minister’s Office has concealed even the identity of those who participated in the three-day discussion with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. When Tansa requested the Cabinet Secretariat and Cabinet Office for information disclosure, they refused to disclose documents showing the names and positions of those who participated. The reasons given by both the Cabinet Secretariat and the Cabinet Office were the same.

“Although we have consulted with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau regarding the Cabinet decision to hold a state funeral, we have not created or acquired any administrative documents related to the request, or have discarded them and are no longer in possession of them.”

However, in the government’s brief of the fourth oral argument, the names and positions were revealed.

Yoshiyuki Nishizawa

Former Cabinet Counselor of the Cabinet Secretariat’s Cabinet Affairs Office, current Director of the Planning and Coordination Division of Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communication’s Administrative Management Bureau

 

Hiroshi Onmayashiki

Former Counsellor of the Cabinet Secretariat’s Cabinet Affairs Office, current Director of Fisheries Insurance of Fisheries Agency’s Fisheries Policy Planning Department

 

Mamoru Nakajima

Former Director of the Minister’s Secretariat of Cabinet Office’s General Affairs Division, current Deputy Director General for Okinawa Affairs of Minister’s Secretariat of Cabinet Office

 

Taro Tahara

Former Deputy Director of the Minister’s Secretariat’s General Affairs Division of Cabinet Office, current Assistant Counsellor of the Minister’s Secretariat’s Records and Archives Management Division of Cabinet Office

Along with the brief, the government submitted reports from four bureaucrats who participated in the three-day discussion with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. Each person spoke about the three days. The following is a summary.

Testimony by Yoshiyuki Nishizawa, Cabinet Counselor of the Cabinet Secretariat’s Cabinet Affairs Office

Following the death of the former Prime Minister Abe, the government considered how to arrange a memorial service. Based on a cabinet decision, the Cabinet Secretariat and Cabinet Office agreed that a state funeral, a national ceremony, could be held. Because the content of the plan involved legal issues, we decided to consult the Cabinet Legislation Bureau.

I don’t remember the specific details, but in the afternoon of July 12, we prepared a draft document titled, “Regarding the cabinet’s decision to hold a state funeral for the former prime minister as a national ceremony,” and shared it with the Cabinet Office. I provided the outline of the draft document, and another bureaucrat from the Cabinet Secretariat, Counsellor Onmayashiki, fleshed it out.

On the evening of July 12, I, Counsellor Onmayajiki, and the Cabinet Office bureaucrats in charge, Director Nakajima of the General Affairs Division of the Minister’s Secretariat and Deputy Director Tahara, visited the Cabinet Legislation Bureau.

Counsellor Norikoshi was present, but I can’t recall the number of Cabinet Legislation Bureau attendees or their names. I presented the draft document and explained its contents, but at the time the Cabinet Legislation Bureau did not provide any particular feedback. I don’t remember what was discussed or how long it took.

I only visited the Cabinet Legislation Bureau once, on that day.

I recall receiving a call from the Cabinet Legislation Bureau between July 12 and 14th, informing me about amendments to the draft document. These amendments did not result in a change in the perspectives of the Cabinet Secretariat and the Cabinet Office.

However, the correspondence with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau and amending the draft during this time was handled by Counsellor Onmayashiki, and I am not aware of when, by whom, or how many times he was contacted.

I remember that I reviewed the amended draft document by Counsellor Onmayashikii, which he sent to our superior, the Director General of the Cabinet Affairs Office. The Cabinet Secretariat then sent the amended draft document to the Cabinet Legislation Bureau by email. I don’t remember who sent it to whom, or who was in the CC field.

On July 14, I received a call from Counsellor Norikoshi of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. He said that they had no comments regarding the amended draft document. I don’t remember the exact words used, but I do recall that he not only said “no comments” over the phone, but also said something to the effect that “it has been approved by the Director-General of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau.” I reported to my superior, the Director General of the Cabinet Affairs Office, that the Director-General of the Legislation Bureau had also approved the document.

I don’t remember the exact date the draft document was destroyed. I regularly discard documents and emails that I don’t need to keep. I think I did the same with the draft document. This is because the Cabinet Legislation Bureau’s amendments did not affect the decision to hold a state funeral based on a cabinet decision.

In response to Tansa’s request for disclosure of information, I myself searched the area around my desk in my office, my own device, and my official cell phone, but was unable to find any documents that were the subject of the disclosure request.

Testimony of Hiroshi Onmayashiki, Counsellor of the Cabinet Secretariat’s Cabinet Affairs Office

Following the death of the former Prime Minister Abe, the government considered how to arrange a memorial service. Based on a cabinet decision, the Cabinet Secretariat and Cabinet Office agreed that a state funeral, a national ceremony, could be held. Because the content of the plan involved legal issues, we decided to consult the Cabinet Legislation Bureau.

I prepared the draft document and shared it with Counsellor Nishizawa and the Cabinet Office.

On the evening of July 12, Counsellor Nishizawa, Director Mamoru Nakajima of the General Affairs Division of the Minister’s Secretariat, and a person from the General Affairs Division from the Cabinet Office whose name I cannot remember visited the Cabinet Legislation Bureau:

I presented the draft document to Counsellor Norikoshi at the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, and another person in charge whose name I don’t remember. I don’t remember the specifics of the exchange, but although there were questions about the details and confirmations about the facts, there were no comments that would require any amendments or preparation of additional documents. I don’t remember exactly how long it took, but it was probably around an hour. It wasn’t that long.

I only visited the Cabinet Legislation Bureau once, on that day.

After my visit to the Cabinet Legislation Bureau on July 12, I received phone calls from Counsellor Norikoshi or a person in charge at the Legislation Bureau between then and July 14. I do not remember the specific dates and times, or how many calls I received.

The call was about the amendments to the draft document, mainly to add the following sentence, which was not in the original draft.

“Funerals conducted as government affairs at government expense will not necessarily be held for people who meet certain conditions in the future.”

In response to a request from the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, I amended the draft document. I don’t remember the specific way of sharing it, but after getting permission from Counsellor Nishizawa, I emailed the amended draft document to the Director General of the Cabinet Affairs Office, Counsellor Nishizawa, and the Minister’s Secretariat’s General Affairs Division staff member who accompanied us to the Legislation Bureau.

I also sent the amended draft document to the Cabinet Legislation Bureau’s Counsellor Norikoshi and perhaps to the person in charge by email. I don’t remember if I included anyone in the CC field.

On July 14, the Cabinet Secretariat received a call from Counsellor Norikoshi or a person in charge at the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. I don’t remember who the call was to, but they said that they had no comments about the amended draft document.

I had kept the draft document on my computer. I disposed of documents that I don’t need to keep. I disposed of the draft document, both paper and electronic.

In response to Tansa’s request for disclosure of information, I myself searched the area around my desk in my office, my own device, and my official cell phone, but was unable to find the documents that were the subject of the disclosure request.

Testimony by Mamoru Nakajima, Director of the Minister’s Secretariat of Cabinet Office’s General Affairs Division

Former Prime Minister Abe passed away on July 8, and the government deliberated on the nature of his funeral. The possibility of holding a state funeral, a national ceremony, based on a cabinet decision involved legal issues. On July 12, the Cabinet Secretariat’s Cabinet Affairs Office informed us that it was necessary to seek the opinion of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. I recall visiting the Cabinet Legislation Bureau together with the Cabinet Secretariat that day.

The draft document was prepared by the Cabinet Secretariat, and the Cabinet Office had no objections to its contents.

I am not sure how the draft document shared by the Cabinet Secretariat was brought to me because I was extremely busy at the time.

On July 12, Counsellor Nishizawa and Counsellor Onmayashiki from the Cabinet Secretariat, and myself and Deputy Director Tahara from the Cabinet Office, visited the Cabinet Legislation Bureau’s First Division. The person in charge of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau was Counsellor Norikoshi, and there was one other person present, but I don’t remember his name.

The Cabinet Legislation Bureau did not make any specific comments at the time, and I recall that it was decided that they were going to temporarily take care of the case. I don’t remember the exact time of the visit that day, but it was already dark outside, and I have the impression that the visit didn’t last very long and ended relatively quickly.

After that, the Cabinet Office did not have any further contact with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau. The Cabinet Secretariat contacted me to say that the Cabinet Legislation Bureau had given its approval to the draft document. I recall reporting this to the Administrative Vice-Minister and the Director General of the Cabinet Office.

I don’t remember when I disposed of the draft document, but I have always shredded paper documents that no longer need to be kept, so I think I did the same. I also delete emails at regular intervals.

Following Tansa’s request for disclosure of information, I checked the paper documents in the office of the General Affairs Division’s Director, and just to be sure, I checked the mailboxes on my computer and official mobile phone, but no documents were found.

Testimony of Taro Tahara, Deputy Director of the Minister’s Secretariat’s General Affairs Division of Cabinet Office

On the evening of July 12, I visited the First Division of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau together with Cabinet Secretariat Counsellor Nishizawa, Counsellor Onmayashiki, and Director Nakajima of the Minister’s Secretariat of Cabinet Office’s General Affairs Division. There was no particular discussion that would lead to a change in the course, and as I recall, the meeting ended rather quickly.

After that, I had no further contact with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau until July 14. My main job was reviewing laws and regulations at the Cabinet Office, which kept me constantly busy, so I don’t particularly remember anything about the status of the state funeral for Shinzo Abe.

I don’t remember when the Cabinet Office discarded the draft document that it received from the Cabinet Secretariat. I think it was discarded as part of the process of diligently discarding anything that is no longer needed.

Following Tansa’s request for information, I checked my official computer and office space just to be sure, but no documents were found.

[Commentary] All four bureaucrats involved in the mysterious destruction of documents and emails within three months / Editor-in-Chief Makoto Watanabe

Presiding Judge Kenji Shinoda asked for an explanation of the discussion with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau that took place from July 12 to 14, being mindful of “5W1H.” However, the four bureaucrats who participated in the discussion frequently used the phrase “I don’t remember” in their report. While it is a step forward that the names and positions of those who participated in the discussion have been released, there is likely still more that remains hidden.

Surprisingly, all four of them claimed to have “discarded the draft document,” as though they had coordinated their stories. They looked through their computers, offices, and even official cell phones in response to Tansa’s request for information disclosure, but they were unable to find anything. “I’m not sure of my memory, but I normally discard unnecessary documents.” I guess they threw away the draft document because it was unnecessary. That’s their logic.

This is strange.

The draft document was used in discussion with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau until July 14, 2022. Tansa submitted an information request on September 26. Is it possible that all four of them destroyed documents, including emails, within three months? Furthermore, none of them are able to specify when they were destroyed.

The four testified only about the draft document, but they must have taken and kept various other records as well.

For example, Cabinet Secretariat Counsellor Onmayashiki stated that at the request of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, the following sentence was added to the initial draft document:

“Funerals conducted as government affairs at government expense will not necessarily be held for people who meet certain conditions in the future.”

This is a crucial addition, as the Cabinet Legislation Bureau has made it clear that the document does not go so far as to indicate that “state funerals must be held in the future if certain conditions are met.”

When former Prime Minister Eisaku Sato passed away, Yoshikuni Ichiro, Director-General of the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, pointed out in a meeting with the government that “a consensus is needed between the judiciary, legislature, and administration.” A state funeral was not held at that time. Given this, the administration can also interpret the additional instructions from the Cabinet Legislation Bureau as a warning that “just because it meets the conditions set by the administration does not mean that a state funeral can be held without the Legislation Bureau’s review.”

Naturally, the Cabinet Legislation Bureau’s instructions to add the additional line would have to be explained to then Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and other key members of the administration. Records of correspondence with the Cabinet Legislation Bureau would have been kept and the documents would be preserved.

Nevertheless, will the government continue to deny the allegations, insisting that “there are no documents at all”? Sanae Takaichi, who was close to Abe, became the new prime minister. The government may be even more keen to cover up the allegations.

This is where Tansa must persevere. Together with our legal team, Tansa will open a crack. Public documents do not belong to politicians and bureaucrats. They belong to the citizens.

(Originally published in Japanese on October 6, 2025. Translation by Mana Shibata.)

Democracy Behind Closed Doors: All articles