Statement on Nick Baker case

12.00.00am BST (GMT +0100) Wed 28th May 2003

Statement given to the press conference on 28th May 2003 in Tokyo by Baroness Sarah Ludford MEP & Sabine Zanker of Fair Trials Abroad

Nicholas Baker is at risk of being sentenced in two weeks' time to 15 years in prison for a crime he did not commit. He has certainly not been proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt, nor has he been treated as an innocent person.

He has in fact been proved guilty of just one thing - of coming to Japan as a tourist with a man he considered his friend. But the only tourist experience he has had is a guided tour of the facilities of Chiba Detention Centre.

We maintain that a gross miscarriage of justice is in the making. If nothing is done to stop it, all of us - and others not present - will bear on our conscience that we watched this horror movie unfold though we had the collective power to change the ending.

Our press conference here today is intended as wake-up call to the Japanese and indeed the international community to uphold the human rights to which we all subscribe. Japan is a beautiful country with a rich history and traditions that wishes to uphold its democratic reputation. We come here as friends to help it do that - with your assistance.

Our personal belief in the system of Japanese justice has been profoundly shaken by our experience of following this case at a distance for the last 10 months. That is why we have travelled 7,000 miles to be here today, to raise awareness of the magnitude of the injustice perpetrated on Nick Baker, and indeed on others.

In particular, we wish to highlight two areas of acute concern:

1. The failure to collect or bring in crucial evidence (for example relating to ownership of the suitcase and fingerprints on the drugs, and the activities of Nick's travelling companion Mr Jones in other countries notably Belgium) which would substantiate his claim that he was duped.

We can only conclude from this staggering oversight or refusal that the prosecution feared admitting this evidence would disprove their allegation. What reason would they have to obstruct evidence unless they feared that the effect of the judge getting a balanced view of the case would be a conclusion that Nick was innocent?

2. The unfair conduct of the investigation by the police and the defective preparation of the case by the prosecutor.

Any assertion that Mr Baker's statement was made under fair conditions is undermined by the failure both to tape and to have a lawyer present at the interrogation interviews, and by the fact that Mr Baker was asked to sign a document in Japanese, a language he clearly he did not understand. The fact that the contents of this statement were admitted as the sole prosecution evidence apart from the presence of the drugs, and that Mr Baker's signature was taken as an endorsement of its contents is nothing short of staggering for a justice system that claims to abide by the rule of law.

We are also alarmed that because of his stubborn refusal to cooperate by pleading guilty Nick Baker was put in solitary confinement for 10 months, and that he was held - in common with all prisoners - under unacceptable conditions such as no heating or air conditioning. He is given thirty minutes of exercise outside, three times a week, and until recently could only take a bath in a dirty bucket of water twice a week. As a result of these conditions, he has suffered mental as well as physical ill-health.

Due to the above defects, we believe the handling of this case falls far short of international standards for a fair trial to which Japan has signed up. Certainly in Europe, this would not be tolerated and there would be a public outcry.

We understand that there has been considerable controversy in recent months about prison conditions and worrying numbers of deaths in custody of Japanese citizens. Also, a few months ago some Japanese people came home after, they said, wrongly serving over a decade in prison after being duped in a way similar to Nick Baker. Thus we believe these issues of treatment of detainees and miscarriage of justice are not something just of concern to foreigners but are close to the heart of Japanese society.

Therefore we urge you, the press, to make your fellow citizens aware of what is happening in your proud country. International respect is gained not by saving face, but by serving justice.

Finally, we would like to address directly the three judges presiding in Mr. Baker's case. At this stage in the case, the ball is chiefly in their court.

We realize that in Japan, criminal cases have a 99.3% conviction rate. The shocking reality seems to be that all accused are presumed guilty. We know that a finding of innocence is so rare in this country that such a verdict, regardless of the crime, is in itself news. We can imagine that judges who hand down a not-guilty verdict will feel the pressure of their peers, and that they might find their careers do not progress in the way they had expected.

Yet we appeal to the three judges handling this case to honour the principles of justice that they have sworn to upheld. We want you to ask yourselves as judges, and as human beings: 'Do I really want to sentence a hard-working man and loving father to fifteen years of hard labour, without considering ALL the evidence? Do I really want to rubber-stamp another victory for the prosecution or do I have the courage to join the 1% of Japanese judges who will let an innocent man go free?'

We understand that even a junior prison guard, who had read the Japanese news reports on Nick's trial, had the clarity and courage to say to him in his faltering English: "Nick, I've read the reports. I believe you're innocent. Go home, Nick."

If there is indeed justice in Japan, Nick Baker will be going home to his loving and anxious family. If he is kept here, you can be rest assured of two things: not only will the quality of Japanese justice be openly questioned in England and abroad, but many British citizens will think twice before visiting this country.