Court partly overturns damages for hecklers removed from Abe speech

The ruling is essentially saying, "We believe in free speech but not that much free speech!"

At the end of the day, politicians work for us, not the other way around. In a so-called democracy such as this, it's not only entirely justifiable but actually completely necessary that tax-paying citizens are afforded the right to openly criticize the performance of government officials, and when and where that occurs is not up for any court to decide.

JayToday  06:53 am JST

At the end of the day, politicians work for us, not the other way around. 

evidently not!!!

According to the ruling, the plaintiffs shouted "step down, Abe" and "no tax hike" while he spoke in the vicinity of JR Sapporo Station on July 15, 2019, as part of campaigning for the House of Councillors election.

Oof... The things people spend their time arguing over amazes me.

Japanese democracy at its finest. Welcome to the DRJ (democratic republic of Japan)

According to the ruling, the plaintiffs shouted "step down, Abe" and "no tax hike"

Have to love the Japanese courts in their unwavering opposition to the good of the people and support for the Japan Inc./LDP status quo.

I suppose the above quotes were what they used to rule that the plaintiff "posed a threat to Abe"?

And their freedom of expression was not violated?

Japanese courts would repulse Kafka.

I have never really thought deeply about it, but since the LDP has been in power 95% of post WW2 they must be the ones appointing powerful judges. Results follow.

"But the high court said the removal of Osugi, 35, was legal due to reasonable concerns he could be hurt by others in the crowd or pose a threat to Abe.

As for Momoi, 27, it noted that she was already some way away from Abe when she was moved by the police."

Quite arbitrary but this essentially mean politicians in Japan have one directional rights to using public places as their propaganda outlets to spread whatever lies they choose absent any protests.

The Japanese public continue to be downtrodden and have their rights trampled on!

Nevermind, just as long as they pay their masters taxes, all will be fine…

When has anyone here ever really seen a politician work "for us" other than prior to an election, if that?

Japan the democracy... As long as you don't oppose the government

High Court judges are well-trained with one eye open on their future career path, always remembering to click their heels, cock their ears to HMV and bark on cue with specious argument whenever the State scrooges its citizens. The ways of Japanese democracy are mysterious, not. Appeals have as much chance as anyone in a Kafka novel. "Justice" is whatever they say.

u-s- reamer - right on the money.

In no other democratic nation I know of would the people accept this.

A very simple, passive expression of opinion and LDP Incs "authorities" move in to ...you know to quell the unrest.

And it's all about their safety.

How about the police do their job and protect lawful citizens from the thugs if they suspect violence.

Weak as.

Not enough money for blatantly muting freedom of speech. Why do these things take 4 years?

Abe had a right to free speech too and if these people wished to speak then they should have waited their turn and addressed the crowd when Abe had finished instead of trying to interrupt him to stop him speaking.

But American media won't label this in the same level they do about China.

The takeaway: Keep quiet peasants when your masters speak. Now pay your taxes and slave away at your oppressive employment.

@eastman, Kipling

democracy is red or blue. Money.

I wish I could speak Chinese, but at my age…

Police officers then surrounded Osugi and Momoi and forced them to move to the back of the crowd. Momoi was then followed by a police officer for an extended time.

Forced them in what way? They were surrounded and followed. The Japanese police can do that to anyone without any particular reason, as long as they don't use force.

Fascist court says what?

A lot of criticism here, but is it so different in other countries? Heckling generally has limits, and if a public event is disrupted, the hecklers can usually be removed.

by constitution we have guaranteed freedom of of speech.

in reality freedom of speech is violated by many,not just by police.i wrote about great example above but for some reason someone did not like that direct on topic comment so its "gone".

business as usual here.

my words just get confirmed instantly.

by constitution we have guaranteed freedom of of speech.

That is all good and well, but heckling claims the freedom of "more speech than the other". If you disrupt the speaker by heckling you are limiting their freedom of speech. It must be possible that one can present one's ideas without seeking the approval of hecklers first. This goes for both sides.

If the politicians want uninterrupted speeches, they are free to rent a venue and hire their private security to deal with hecklers. Public venues are... well, public, free for anyone to express their opinions at any time anywhere and yes that includes speeches of Abe and whichever puppet of Nippon Kaigi is the PM at that time. The police are not supposed to be the gestapo for LDP, they should ascertain public safety.