Ghosn Lawyers Request Dismissal, Citing Rights Violation

Matt Posky
by Matt Posky

Legal representatives for former Nissan chairman Carlos Ghosn are requesting Japanese courts dismiss all charges against him on the grounds that prosecutors violated his rights. The filings were submitted ahead of Thursday’s pre-trial hearing before the Tokyo District Court and represent the first real look we’ve had at Ghosn’s defense — which, until now, has just involved him repeatedly professing his innocence.

The core issues focus on accusations of illegal evidence collection and a Nissan-led conspiracy to place him behind bars. But Ghosn’s legal team has also established rebuttals to the charges leveled against him. While those will only come into play if the trial moves forward, we’re skeptical that the case will be dissolved. But let’s begin a little closer to the beginning.

Ghosn was arrested in November of 2018 on suspicion of financial misconduct. Since then, he’s revolved in and out of police custody on charges that he repeatedly underreported his salary with Nissan, transferred personal financial losses to the company, and attempted to enrich himself by authorizing payments to car dealers in other parts of the world.

During that time, the former executive claimed he was on the receiving end of a corporate coup — while his lawyers accused Japanese prosecutors of trying to muzzle their client by keeping him isolated and offline. The new filing takes things a step further by alleging Japanese prosecutors illegally allowed Nissan employees to do the investigative work for them.

The defense also stipulates that the automaker unlawfully dispatched employees to invade Ghosn’s residences and illegally seize personal property and attorney-client privileged documents. It also questions the handling of privileged notes held by Mrs. Carole Ghosn, who has been prohibited from visiting her husband. Their lawyers have said this is in direct violation of international laws on family separation and Japan’s own constitution.

“The prosecution against him resulted from unlawful collusion between the prosecutors, government officials at METI [Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry], and executives at Nissan, who formed a secret task force to drum up allegations of wrongdoing by Mr. Ghosn as a pretext to remove him as head of the Alliance,” his attorneys said in a statement on Thursday.

Ghosn’s team is also trying establish proof of a legal bias against him. While some of this revolves around criticism of how long it’s taking the case to reach trail, prosecutors are also targeted for ignoring Japanese executives ( like Hiroto Saikawa) who admitted to similar activities. The defense team suggests this may be indicative of the Japanese courts having an unfavorable opinion of foreigners — something the country has a poor track record on.

However, it’s the withheld evidence that’s likely to be the most damning issue. Junichi Hironaka, one of Ghosn’s key lawyers, has stated on multiple occasions that the prosecution has failed to share information. The court filing suggest over 6,000 pieces of digital evidence has been kept away from the defense team. “That remaining evidence is what prosecutors don’t want us to see. So, we can assume that the evidence should be of benefit to us once,” Hironaka explained. “They are withholding evidences, so there is no telling what has been deleted.”

Ultimately, the defense says the entire case was politically motivated and should be dismissed on those grounds. While unproven, recent activities within Nissan and Renault certainly provide a lot of anecdotal evidence that at least two groups were jockeying for power — with Ghosn and company losing out. This does not assure a dismissal, requiring more direct rebuttals to the charges being faced.

Regarding the millions of dollars in unreported compensation, the defense claims Nissan’s securities filings accurately disclosed Ghosn’s payments. Any additional compensation was never committed to by Nissan and therefore never received.

The breach of trust charges will be more difficult to counter, however. Ghosn’s team hopes to show that the transactions in question never caused financial losses at Nissan and were repaid. But the presumed funneling of money through business associates in the Middle East to enrich Ghosn’s family and friends already looks pretty bad. Their play will be to attempt to prove these deals were legitimate by leveraging proof that they had the formal endorsement of other high-ranking Nissan executives.

Despite the trail previously being planned for September, Japan has yet to establish an official date for Ghosn to face his accusers. Japanese media suggests things could finally kick off in the spring of 2020.

Matt Posky
Matt Posky

A staunch consumer advocate tracking industry trends and regulation. Before joining TTAC, Matt spent a decade working for marketing and research firms based in NYC. Clients included several of the world’s largest automakers, global tire brands, and aftermarket part suppliers. Dissatisfied with the corporate world and resentful of having to wear suits everyday, he pivoted to writing about cars. Since then, that man has become an ardent supporter of the right-to-repair movement, been interviewed on the auto industry by national radio broadcasts, driven more rental cars than anyone ever should, participated in amateur rallying events, and received the requisite minimum training as sanctioned by the SCCA. Handy with a wrench, Matt grew up surrounded by Detroit auto workers and managed to get a pizza delivery job before he was legally eligible. He later found himself driving box trucks through Manhattan, guaranteeing future sympathy for actual truckers. He continues to conduct research pertaining to the automotive sector as an independent contractor and has since moved back to his native Michigan, closer to where the cars are born. A contrarian, Matt claims to prefer understeer — stating that front and all-wheel drive vehicles cater best to his driving style.

More by Matt Posky

Comments
Join the conversation
4 of 5 comments
  • Inside Looking Out Inside Looking Out on Oct 24, 2019

    I wonder what James LeBron has to say about this situation? I am all ears.

  • Hydromatic Hydromatic on Oct 26, 2019

    It's clear that none of the TTAC commentariat give a flying fig about any of this, so maybe save the recaps for the actual trial?

    • ToolGuy ToolGuy on Oct 26, 2019

      Venn diagram: - People who are in the know about a given company's situation - People who read with interest about the same - People who are forbidden to post about their employer on social media - People who read TTAC - People who post on TTAC - People with an opinion - People with an informed opinion There are people who read this and are interested in this but do not post on this. No posts does not necessarily imply no interest.

  • W Conrad I'm not afraid of them, but they aren't needed for everyone or everywhere. Long haul and highway driving sure, but in the city, nope.
  • Jalop1991 In a manner similar to PHEV being the correct answer, I declare RPVs to be the correct answer here.We're doing it with certain aircraft; why not with cars on the ground, using hardware and tools like Telsa's "FSD" or GM's "SuperCruise" as the base?Take the local Uber driver out of the car, and put him in a professional centralized environment from where he drives me around. The system and the individual car can have awareness as well as gates, but he's responsible for the driving.Put the tech into my car, and let me buy it as needed. I need someone else to drive me home; hit the button and voila, I've hired a driver for the moment. I don't want to drive 11 hours to my vacation spot; hire the remote pilot for that. When I get there, I have my car and he's still at his normal location, piloting cars for other people.The system would allow for driver rest period, like what's required for truckers, so I might end up with multiple people driving me to the coast. I don't care. And they don't have to be physically with me, therefore they can be way cheaper.Charge taxi-type per-mile rates. For long drives, offer per-trip rates. Offer subscriptions, including miles/hours. Whatever.(And for grins, dress the remote pilots all as Johnnie.)Start this out with big rigs. Take the trucker away from the long haul driving, and let him be there for emergencies and the short haul parts of the trip.And in a manner similar to PHEVs being discredited, I fully expect to be razzed for this brilliant idea (not unlike how Alan Kay wasn't recognized until many many years later for his Dynabook vision).
  • B-BodyBuick84 Not afraid of AV's as I highly doubt they will ever be %100 viable for our roads. Stop-and-go downtown city or rush hour highway traffic? I can see that, but otherwise there's simply too many variables. Bad weather conditions, faded road lines or markings, reflective surfaces with glare, etc. There's also the issue of cultural norms. About a decade ago there was actually an online test called 'The Morality Machine' one could do online where you were in control of an AV and choose what action to take when a crash was inevitable. I think something like 2.5 million people across the world participated? For example, do you hit and most likely kill the elderly couple strolling across the crosswalk or crash the vehicle into a cement barrier and almost certainly cause the death of the vehicle occupants? What if it's a parent and child? In N. America 98% of people choose to hit the elderly couple and save themselves while in Asia, the exact opposite happened where 98% choose to hit the parent and child. Why? Cultural differences. Asia puts a lot of emphasis on respecting their elderly while N. America has a culture of 'save/ protect the children'. Are these AV's going to respect that culture? Is a VW Jetta or Buick Envision AV going to have different programming depending on whether it's sold in Canada or Taiwan? how's that going to effect legislation and legal battles when a crash inevitibly does happen? These are the true barriers to mass AV adoption, and in the 10 years since that test came out, there has been zero answers or progress on this matter. So no, I'm not afraid of AV's simply because with the exception of a few specific situations, most avenues are going to prove to be a dead-end for automakers.
  • Mike Bradley Autonomous cars were developed in Silicon Valley. For new products there, the standard business plan is to put a barely-functioning product on the market right away and wait for the early-adopter customers to find the flaws. That's exactly what's happened. Detroit's plan is pretty much the opposite, but Detroit isn't developing this product. That's why dealers, for instance, haven't been trained in the cars.
  • Dartman https://apnews.com/article/artificial-intelligence-fighter-jets-air-force-6a1100c96a73ca9b7f41cbd6a2753fdaAutonomous/Ai is here now. The question is implementation and acceptance.
Next