The guru's role in murder

オウム真理教元教祖に死刑判決

Asahara, a self-styled prophet of Armageddon, was found guilty on 13 criminal counts that caused 27 deaths, including the 1995 sarin gas attack on the Tokyo subway system that killed 12 and injured thousands; the 1994 sarin poisoning in Matsumoto, Nagano Prefecture, that left seven people dead and sickened hundreds; and the 1989 slayings of anti-Aum lawyer Tsutsumi Sakamoto and his family. According to the ruling, Asahara "masterminded" not only the manufacture and use of the deadly gas but indiscriminate terrorist attacks in a bid to militarize the cult. In doing so, the statement said he "exhibited a fanatic desire to promote himself and control others."

The trial took seven years and 10 months. This seems simply too long, even considering the peculiar problems that stood in the way, such as the defendant's consistent refusal to answer questions. Now that the sentence has been delivered, a review of the whole process is in order. Also needed is a further analysis of the dilemmas in modern society that seemed to have sent so many young people knocking at Aum's door.

The focal question in the trial was: Did Asahara actually give orders to kill? The defense counsel said no, putting all the blame on senior disciples who "ran amok."

The question took an oddly semantic twist as well: What did poa — the religious password used by Asahara — really mean? The defense counsel said it meant raising a person to a higher level of spirituality. The ruling said, however, it was a secret code for "kill" that was used in the slayings of the Sakamoto family. The conclusion was that Asahara plotted all 13 crimes with his aides.

The frustrating thing is that it took nearly eight years to reach that conclusion. The trial would have lasted much longer had it not been for extraordinary steps taken by the prosecution, such as dropping nearly 4,000 surviving victims of the subway attack from their case.

A trial is a time-consuming process. It takes time for the defense team to prepare its case, particularly in an elaborate trial such as this one. A defendant has the right to keep silent, and this causes delays in the proceedings. It would be wrong to blame the defendant for exercising this right.

Still, the delay in the Asahara trial was not inevitable. The defense — a scratch team of state-appointed lawyers — could have worked more efficiently; they were criticized for using delaying tactics. The court showed itself to be largely powerless in facilitating the trial. Some of these mistakes must be avoided if the trials that lie ahead — at the appellate levels — are to proceed with reasonable speed.

The lesson is obvious: A speedy and substantive trial is essential not only to uncover the truth but to help heal victims' traumas and rehabilitate defendants. Indeed, this is the basic tenet of the trial facilitation law that took effect last year, which sets a two-year limit on all first trials.

The ruling attributes the murders to Asahara's "illusory ambition to expand the cult through militarization and to rule Japan as its savior and king." It is hard to understand how such a deranged visionary attracted thousands of promising young men and women, and why some blindly obeyed his horrendous orders.

During the trial, Asahara presented a pathetic picture of a disheveled and worn-out middle-aged man with no religious fervor, yet he apparently commands awe and respect among an estimated 1,600 followers in Japan. The group no longer enjoys formal status as a religious entity, but its appeal to youths is likely to remain strong despite the death sentence against its founder.

Aum Shinrikyo is seen as a pathological phenomenon of a modern society in which young people, bereft of spiritual moorings, seek a new haven in radical cults. Asahara's death sentence is no assurance that Aum will become extinct. It could even get a new lease on life if he is revered as a "martyr." That is why non-judiciary means must be sought to combat the Aum syndrome.

The Japan Times Weekly
March. 6, 2004
(C) All rights reserved

      被告は、27人の死亡の原因になった13事件について、有罪と認定された。これらの事件は、12人が死亡し数千人が負傷した95年の地下鉄サリン事件や、7人が死亡、数百人が負傷した94年の長野県・松本サリン事件、そして89年の坂本弁護士一家殺害事件を含む。

      裁判には7年10ヵ月が費やされた。被告による一貫した黙秘権行使などの問題を考慮しても、これは長すぎる。判決が下された今、裁判手続の見直しが必要だ。検察は4000人近くの負傷者を少人数に絞り込む訴因変更を請求したが、この特別措置がなければ裁判はさらに長期化したに違いない。

      裁判は事実の解明のためばかりでなく、被害者の精神的苦痛を和らげ、被告の社会復帰を促すためにも迅速化する必要がある。昨年成立した「裁判の迅速化に関する法律」では、第一審を2年以内に結審させることを定めている。

      今回の判決文は、被告が教団を武装化させて勢力を拡大し、将来は「王として、救世主として日本を支配する」ことを狙って事件を起こしたことを述べた。なぜ、狂った妄想家に数千人もの若者が惹きつけられ、教団幹部が彼の常軌を逸した命令に従ったのかは謎である。

      ほとんど盲目といわれる被告は、むさくるしい中年男だが、今も1600人にのぼる信者に崇拝されているという。

      オウム真理教（現アーレフ）はすでに宗教法人としての資格はないが、教祖が死刑を言い渡されても、教団が消滅する保証はない。被告が「殉教者」として崇められれば、オウム延命につながる可能性もある。オウム問題を解決するため、非司法的措置が求められる所以である。