Who is Kenichi Tanaka, who described Kakki Nakano as his "sole subordinate"?
Regarding the series of issues surrounding Mr. Toshiyuki Nakano, the Last One Mile Labor Union has, through multiple articles, raised issues based on public reports, local information, witness testimonies from related parties, audio recordings, and documentation.
Meanwhile, our association has confirmed the fact that a person claiming to be "Kenichi Tanaka" has been sending defamation-style emails to people around our associates, utilizing reports on Mr. Nakano's criminal case.
The email in question included statements that seemed to link individuals whose names have not been disclosed in public reports to specific people. Furthermore, phrasing intended to urge the recipient to reconsider contractual and business relationships with individuals affiliated with our union was also confirmed.
As an association, we strongly suspect that this is not merely an inquiry or expression of opinion from a general reader, but rather an act intended to damage the social credibility of our union members and associates by exploiting the issues surrounding Mr. Nakano, and it can inevitably be imagined as the work of individuals who are frantically trying to disrupt our association's activities.
Please note that in this article, giving top priority to the protection of the affected cooperative members and recipient companies, no information that could identify the individuals or companies will be included.
An email sent by a person identifying themselves as Kenichi Tanaka
The email confirmed by our association was sent through a certain company's inquiry form.
The sender identified himself as Mr. Kenichi Tanaka, and the body of the email cited publicly reported news regarding Mr. Toshiyuki Nakano in a manner that urged disadvantageous judgments regarding individuals affiliated with our association.
Specifically, expressions with the following intent were included.
- Mr. Nakano is the only subordinate who has substantially supported a certain person's work.
- Shouldn't we carefully consider the reputation risk and compliance impacts?
- I would like you to re-evaluate whether or not to continue the contract with this person.
Frankly speaking, the first thing our association felt upon seeing this wording is that the issues surrounding Mr. Nakano have become, in a different sense, much easier to understand due to the entry of seemingly peripheral figures.
Because that email is not merely at the level of a third party expressing their impressions after reading a published article.
It contains information that could not be known without being aware of the surrounding circumstances of people related to our association, and it even goes so far as to describe the relationship with Mr. Nakano as his "sole subordinate."
So, who exactly is Kenichi Tanaka?
Since Mr. Tanaka goes so far as to describe Mr. Nakano as his "only subordinate," there is a possibility that he is a person who is quite familiar with Mr. Nakano's past operational reality, personal relationships, and information regarding related parties.
On the other hand, if Mr. Tanaka is an individual unrelated to Mr. Nakano, a rational explanation is required as to how he was able to send such a message to related parties whose connection could not normally be grasped from public information alone.
The structure of "defamation" using public reports
Multiple media outlets have reported that Tamaki Nakano has been indicted by the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office on charges including violations of the Consumption Tax Act, and has been re-arrested on suspicion of subsidy fraud and other offenses.
According to reports, Mr. Nakano, along with an accomplice, allegedly recorded over 100 million yen in fictitious expenses in connection with a consumption tax law violation case involving a consulting firm in Kagoshima City, thereby avoiding the payment of approximately 2.5 million yen in consumption tax and receiving a refund of approximately 9.5 million yen. Furthermore, reports indicate he was rearrested on suspicion of defrauding an independent administrative agency out of 10 million yen in subsidies.
Reports also indicate that the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office has requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to order the return of the passport, stating that "an accomplice has moved abroad."
However, what is extremely important here is that, based on public reports, the names of the said "accomplices" are naturally not all being made public.
Nevertheless, the email from the person claiming to be Kenichi Tanaka used that news report to give recipients the impression that it concerned people affiliated with our union.
This is not a public service announcement citing news reports.
Rather, it is the use of unconfirmed details in news reports, or parts where names are not explicitly stated in the reports, as ammunition to attack specific individuals.
Our union believes that such actions may involve extremely serious issues from the perspectives of defamation, damage to credit, obstruction of business, information leakage, and the unauthorized acquisition of personal information or transactional information.
Of course, the final determination regarding the illegality of these matters rests not with our union, but with the judicial authorities and relevant agencies. However, our union has at least preserved evidence regarding the existence of the email in question, the recipient, the content sent, and the transmission route, and we are considering consulting and providing information to the relevant authorities as necessary.
The recurring "manufactured self-blame shifting" in the controversy surrounding Mr. Nakano
What our union has consistently focused on regarding the series of issues surrounding Mr. Nakano is not simply whether or not there is a criminal case.
The core of the issue lies in a dynamic where someone creates a problem themselves and attempts to shift the blame to a third party.
According to the recordings, records, and testimonies of related parties that our union has confirmed so far, there is a suspicion that, regarding Mr. Nakano, efforts were being made to use third-party devices, names, relationships, and credit to attribute connections to tax evasion cases and financial problems to another person.
Our union perceives this, for the sake of convenience, as a structure of "self-directed shift of blame."
This email from the person calling himself Kenichi Tanaka may also be an extension of that trend.
In other words, the suspicions and criminal incident reports directed at Mr. Nakano himself are now being used to defame the credibility of individuals associated with our union, urging recipient companies and others to review their contractual relationships.
If this composition is intentional, it is not merely harassment.
It is inevitable that this will be evaluated as an act of exerting social and economic pressure on our union and related parties who are disseminating information regarding the series of issues surrounding Mr. Nakano, with the intent of chilling union activities and the raising of issues of public interest.
If he goes so far as to call himself the "only subordinate," Kenichi Tanaka should explain.
The person calling himself Kenichi Tanaka describes Nakano as his "only subordinate" in the body of the email.
This is a very interesting expression.
As a mere third party, one cannot normally speak definitively about who Mr. Nakano was supporting, what kind of work he was doing, or to what extent.
Furthermore, if Mr. Nakano is positioned as even his "sole subordinate," Mr. Tanaka likely possesses a considerable amount of information regarding Mr. Nakano's actual work conditions, business connections, past actions, and the circumstances leading up to his current criminal case.
As our union, we do not deny the possibility that Mr. Tanaka is a person close to Mr. Nakano.
Rather, if Mr. Tanaka is truly someone well-versed in Mr. Nakano's surrounding circumstances, our union would welcome him.
However, what is not welcome is "joining the fight" in the form of sending anonymous or aggressive emails to related parties.
We will enter the fray by explaining things directly, answering our union's questions, and refuting them if necessary.
If Mr. Tanaka, Mr. Nakano himself, or other related parties provide reasonable rebuttals or explanations, our union is prepared to review the content and, if necessary, publish or append it.
Where did the confidential information leak from?
What our union finds particularly problematic in this email is the selection of the recipients.
The person who goes by the name Kenichi Tanaka did not simply comment on our union's article.
We are sending emails to individuals associated with our union members regarding content that assumes a certain relationship.
This is impossible unless you have prior knowledge of the information regarding the recipient in question.
So, where did you get that information?
Is it from Mr. Nakano himself?
Is it from Mr. Nakano's relatives, associates, representatives, or other collaborators?
Or is the information regarding our union members' associates leaking from another source?
Assuming that the information regarding our association's affiliates was shared with Mr. Nakano or his associates and used for the purpose of damaging our reputation, this is an extremely serious issue.
Regarding this matter, our association plans to formally verify the facts with a person claiming to be Kenichi Tanaka.
Additionally, although the email also listed contact information that appears to be the email address of a person claiming to be Kenichi Tanaka, it is not published in this article.
Our association does not intend to unnecessarily expose the other party's personal information.
The issue at hand is strictly the act itself, which damaged the reputation of those affiliated with our union and was intended to prompt related parties to make disadvantageous decisions.
Open Letter to the Person Calling Himself Kenichi Tanaka
Our union plans to request an interview and fact-checking regarding the following matters from an individual identifying himself as Kenichi Tanaka.
1. Are you Kenichi Tanaka himself?
The name "Kenichi Tanaka" was listed as the sender of the email in question, but our association has not been able to verify his identity at this time.
First, please answer clearly whether the person who sent the email is the actual person named therein, or if a third party used the name.
2. What is your relationship with Mr. Kakuki Nakano?
You describe Mr. Nakano as your "only subordinate."
Given that such expressions are used, it is considered that they possess a certain level of knowledge regarding Mr. Nakano's past business practices and personal relationships.
Please explain your relationship with Mr. Nakano, whether or not you have been in contact, and any past business or personal points of contact.
3. What is the basis for stating "only subordinate"?
On what grounds did you describe Mr. Nakano as the "sole subordinate"?
Please clarify whether that basis is an explanation from the individual themselves, hearsay from a third party, or based on documents.
4. How did you obtain the recipient information?
This email has been sent to people associated with our union.
How did you determine the relationship between the recipient and our association members?
Please explain how you obtained that information.
5. What is the purpose of sending the email?
Your email was intended to urge the recipient to reconsider their contractual and transactional relationship with our union's affiliates.
Isn't this intended to diminish the social credibility of those associated with our association?
Also, isn't there an intention to chill the activities of our union, which continues to disseminate information regarding the issues surrounding Mr. Nakano?
6. Did you receive requests or information provision from Mr. Nakano himself or people around him?
Regarding this email transmission, is there any fact that you received requests, instructions, provision of information, remuneration, advice, etc., from Mr. Nakano himself, Mr. Nakano's relatives, related parties, representatives, or other surrounding persons?
If any, please disclose its contents.
7. What is the basis for linking the report on the passport return order to a specific individual?
According to public reports, the Kagoshima District Public Prosecutors Office has requested the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to order the return of the passport of an accomplice.
However, your email reads as though you are using that media report to damage a specific person's reputation.
On what basis did you send content linking the relevant news report to a specific person?
Do you possess information that our association is not aware of or has not made public?
Your email contains information that might not be known just as a reader of published articles.
Do you possess undisclosed information, information regarding related parties, and information regarding our association members concerning Mr. Nakano?
If you have it, please disclose the source.
The Last One Mile Labor Union will not yield to dominant intervention.
Our union does not consider this email to be a mere accidental inquiry.
Regarding the series of issues surrounding Mr. Tsuyoshi Nakano, while our union has continuously raised concerns, defamatory emails aimed at damaging our reputation were sent to individuals associated with our union.
We have no choice but to take this fact as an attack on our union.
Not limited to this occasion, our union has long been subject to continuous, coercive, and dominant intervention centered around Mr. Makoto Watanabe of Last One Mile Inc.
However, our union will not stop broadcasting due to such attacks.
Rather, I believe that this incident has made it even clearer that surrounding the issues involving Mr. Nakano, there still exist personal relationships, information channels, and patterns of shifting blame that need to be unraveled.
It is not only the fact that Mr. Nakano himself has become a defendant in a criminal case that is the problem.
Who in that vicinity knows what, who is leaking information to whom, whose credibility is being damaged, and whose responsibility is being shifted onto whom?
That exact structure is the issue that our union must continue to bring to light.
This matter does not end as the personal problem of Mr. Joki Nakano.
The issues surrounding Mr. Tamaki Nakano have already expanded into multiple points of contention, including a suspected violation of the Consumption Tax Act, allegations of subsidy fraud, a request for a passport revocation order concerning expatriates, allegations of massive embezzlement and fraud in Cambodia, and relationships with Last One Mile Inc. and people around Mr. Makoto Watanabe.
And this time, through the sending of an email by an individual calling himself Kenichi Tanaka, new issues have been added: defamation of our union-related personnel, suspected leakage of related party information, and a structure of shifting responsibility.
Our union will continue to preserve evidence and proceed with necessary confirmations regarding this matter.
Who on earth is Kenichi Tanaka, the man who even described Mr. Nakano as his "sole subordinate"?
Why were you able to send emails to people related to our cooperative?
Are Mr. Nakano himself or individuals close to him involved behind the scenes?
And why is it that in the issues surrounding Mr. Nakano, a pattern of repeatedly shifting responsibility onto third parties emerges?
Aiming for a society where workers can work with peace of mind, our union will continue to raise these issues to the public in the future.