Masao Yamazaki, former president of West Japan Railway Co. (JR West), walks to the Kobe District Court on the morning of Jan. 11, ahead of a ruling on a fatal train derailment accident that killed 107 people in 2005. (Mainichi)
The acquittal of a former president of West Japan Railway Co. (JR West) over a 2005 deadly derailment highlights the difficulties in pursuing the criminal responsibility of a top official of a company over a serious accident.
In its ruling, the Kobe District Court pointed out that the possibility that top officials could have predicted the accident must be proven by specific factors to find them guilty of professional negligence resulting in death, following court precedence over past cases.
Law enforcers have stepped up efforts to pursue the criminal responsibility of top officials of companies over deadly accidents in response to public opinion.
A top executive of the Hotel New Japan was convicted over a deadly 1982 fire, while a bigwig at Paloma Co. were handed the same verdict over a 2005 carbon monoxide poisoning caused by water heaters. The Hotel New Japan executive was found guilty after the court deemed that he was aware of a warning from a fire department. The conviction of the Paloma executive was based on the recognition that he was aware of the defects involving the heaters that caused the accident.
In the 2005 derailment, Masao Yamazaki, who was responsible for safety measures at JR West, had not received any reports that a more advanced automatic train stop (ATS) system should be installed at the scene of the derailment or that the curve at the spot was dangerous.
Prosecutors pointed out that the operators of railways, which transport a massive number of passengers, have duties to predict all possible situations, including train drivers’ operations in excess of the speed limit. They then claimed that executives of railway companies can be convicted of negligence if they can predict accidents might occur sometime in the future.
However, the ruling dismissed the prosecutors’ claims.
While stopping short of holding the defendant personally responsible for the accident, the ruling pointed out that JR West’s safety measures are below the level of those that such large railway operators are expected to achieve.
However, the trial focused only on whether the defendant could have predicted the risk of accidents at the curve that was laid about eight years earlier, and failed to clarify why the driver who died in the accident operated the train far in excess of the speed limit at the curve.
Fundamental discussions are needed on how investigations should be conducted to get to the bottom of similar accidents. (By Takashi Shigeishi, Kobe Bureau)
http://mdn.mainichi.jp/perspectives/news/20120111p2a00m0na022000c.html
