What did Lord Nakano talk about to the Organized Crime Prevention Department?
If he was explaining his situation to the investigating authorities, did he also explain the responsibility to those who work at the New Seisho medical corporation or who cooperated with the business? The Minase Hospital Union will examine the information that Lord Nakano Kishi spoke of a consultation relationship with the police, linking it to the management and financial control issues of the New Seisho group.
The union has received complaints from union members who were responsible for labor support and grant program assistance tasks under Mr. Nakano’s instructions that their wages have not been paid, that after the grant funds were received, the agreed payments to subcontractors and seconded employees have not been made, and that their communications have been ignored.
Meanwhile, the media outlet Public Union also published information that Mr. Nakano had told people about his intention to consult with the Organized Crime Prevention Department, as well as information that suggested he had spoken of the intention to use his arrest abroad to avoid prosecution back in Japan. Is it possible to separate the person’s movements from the contracts, funds, and responsibilities owed to the company’s employees and present them as separate issues?
What the union is asking is what Mr. Nakano expected regarding his own safety, and who was moving the Shinsai Group and who was managing the funds during that time. Both verifying the person’s explanation and verifying the actual status of the related organizations are necessary.
The statement that the Prosecutor's Union mentioned that it is "consulting the Organized Crime Countermeasures Department"
The Union of Prosecutors of the separate media "The Wolf Union" held a press conference on September 2, 2026.An article about the relationship between Lord Nakano and the Organized Crime Prevention DivisionThen, he introduces the information that Nakano had been telling people about his next plan even before he was arrested.
"We are consulting with the Kagoshima Prefectural Police's Organized Crime Countermeasure Division."
This description provides information about what Nakano explained to those around him. It does not reveal how the police viewed the Shinsei Association or what they were investigating. Therefore, what should be revealed next is the content of the consultation.
If you were actually consulting with him, what did Mr. Nakano explain to you about what was happening? Did he only convey the requests made to him or the problems abroad? Or did he explain his role within the Shinsei Association, the limited liability company Inter Shimbashi Medical Service, the PRC Corporation, and the N Corporation, as well as the contracts and financial transactions of the business?
Also, if the police had conducted some form of questioning, what were the subjects of the questioning? Was there a question about the New Sagyo Group’s transactions or instructions system? How did you respond to that question? Instead of simply mentioning the name of the relevant department, you need to concretize the content of the conversation and the questions asked.
Just because there was a mention of contact with the Organized Crime Prevention Department does not necessarily mean that the New Shogyo Association was already under investigation as a "Tokryuu." However, if the contact involved issues involving corporations or related parties, it is an important area for verification as to what was discussed and what was recorded. If it was not, then the question arises as to what facts should be reviewed again based on this declaration.
Statements linking the pursuit in Cambodia with the arrest in Japan
Regarding the issue surrounding Judge Chie Nakano in Cambodia, the Last Mile Labor Union within the same "Minna's Union" has preserved the local-sourced content in an article dated May 18, 2026.
The article introduces a report from the field that claims fraud and embezzlement victims, and states that upon contacting the local investigative agencies, they were told that the person was currently wanted in Cambodia at the time. This is the report as of the time the article was published; it is treated separately from any information indicating the current status of the arrangements or a formal request for Japan.
Also, the Public Prosecutor's Union announced on August 1, 2026An article that covered the relationship between Lord Nakano and the investigative agenciesThe article introduces the information that Nakano had been talking about the intention of being arrested in Japan before the incident occurred in order to avoid prosecution abroad. The article also states that the authenticity of the statement and its context need to be verified.
The union has also received information that Mr. Nakano returned to Japan to avoid uncovering and pursuing the problem in Cambodia. The information about this return and the article that reported on the problem abroad, as well as the statements regarding the arrest, must be reconciled in chronological order, distinguishing between their respective sources.
When they decided to return home, when they came into contact with the police, when they changed the officers of the legal entity or the account manager, and when unpaid bills arose. When these are put together, what kind of judgment and communication took place? Not only the person’s explanation, but also the records left behind at that time are important, not just the evaluation of those around them.
Legal investigations by foreign law enforcement agencies, as well as requests and contacts from private individuals, should not be treated as the same thing. Without explaining what Nakano feared and ascertaining what basis there was for that explanation, it is not possible to verify the Japanese side’s response either.
Did they think of detention as a "free shelter"?
If he really had intended to avoid prosecution abroad by being arrested in Japan, as he had previously stated, the question arises as to whether he was expecting the detention to be used as a refuge for his own benefit. The problem with using the metaphor of a “free shelter” is that this statement indicates the person’s own intention, not the fact that the detention facility was set up for that purpose.
Court Criminal Cases Q&AAs explained, detention is a form of physical restraint that the judge or court examines based on the suspicion of a crime, the risk of fleeing or concealing evidence, and other factors. This is not a decision that will be made based on the individual’s expectation that they “want to be arrested” or that they are “safe in Japan.”
So, was Mr. Nakano trying to deceive the investigative agencies? To investigate this point, we need to determine what exactly he explained, which parts of that explanation differed from objective records, and whether the person himself was aware of the discrepancy. We cannot equate the stories he told to those he actually told to the police or prosecutors.
Assuming that, while providing explanations regarding the person’s safety, the person had hidden important facts about their contractual roles and financial management, the specific explanation and the reasons for the omission would be subject to verification. Was the person asked to provide the same explanation to the relevant parties, or did the records of the organization match? What should be verified is this kind of behavior.
The union does not believe that denouncing the capabilities of the investigative agencies will reveal this issue. We demand to know what explanations were given, what was checked, and what was confirmed. Instead of simply replacing the person’s self-proclaimed “relationship with the police” with the investigative agency’s actual judgment, it is necessary to verify it based on the record of the response.
It should be possible to ensure the safety of the person in question while investigating the actions of the person or the related organization. It is not that you can avoid investigating a transaction because you have safety measures in place, nor is it that you can neglect your own safety because there are suspicions. What is needed is both ensuring safety and verifying facts.
Did they "leave" the Shinshogyo? Or did they continue their involvement through those involved on the outside?
For the Hanazaki Hospital Union, as important as the person’s personal safety is the question of how the Shinsenkai Group’s management has changed since then. Even if Mr. Nakano is unable to directly intervene, the corporation still has a business to run and employees to employ, and it has contracts to fulfill.
According to information provided to the union, Mr. Nakano Kichijiro, Ms. Nakano Nagisa, Mr. Nakano Keita, and Mr. Tanaka Sokyuichiro were involved in the general assembly of the New Shogen Association, and Mr. Nakano and Mr. Tanaka are also on the board of directors. Also, Mr. Nakano Keita and Mr. Tanaka are said to be involved as representatives of Intermedical Services and PRC, and Ms. Harasaki Mikiko is believed to be involved in management duties, including personnel and accounting.
With this structure, it is necessary to determine who has the formal authority and who made the actual decisions. Depending on whether the person made the management decision independently after they were no longer present or whether they received new instructions through communication with the person, there are different records and responsibilities to be verified.
Regarding this point, the Prosecutors' Union held a meeting on August 27, 2026.An article on the relationship between N Co., Ltd. and the Shinseido AssociationIt states that Nakano was involved in N Group’s decision-making through external parties even after his detention. This is a point made by the same media outlet, and it is necessary to confirm his specific involvement in communications and decision-making.
With this information, we cannot simply conclude that "the Shinsoji Association was abandoned." We need to find out whether the association stopped participating or whether it took over the authority, or whether it continued participating in an undeclared manner. Apart from the person’s whereabouts, we need to investigate where the management decisions were made.
In particular, please clarify who made the final decision regarding the verification of grant funds, payments to outsourced partners and employees on leave, and the calculation and payment of wages for union members. If the authority to make payments existed but was not used, please explain who required approval. This explanation should also be requested from the person responsible for the entity currently able to handle such matters.
Not being able to contact one person and not being able to make any decisions as a corporation are not the same thing. If you were making decisions to continue the business, you should explain who made the decisions regarding payments to employees and responses to suppliers.
The verification of "Tokuryu" is based not on department names but on specific actions and the flow of funds.
The Police Agency has announced thatCharacteristics of anonymous and mobile crime groups in the 2024 Police White PaperIt explains the anonymization of the core part that receives criminal proceeds, and the decentralization of the perpetrators. The structure that separates the parties that instruct and those that carry out, and makes it difficult to see who benefits, is considered a challenge in clarifying the actual situation.
To determine whether the Shingyo Group has these characteristics, we first need to identify what specific acts are suspected of constituting a crime. Then, we must determine who recognized those acts, what forms of communication and division of roles existed, and who benefited from them. Simply naming the department of the person who consulted or their family relationships is not sufficient to verify this.
The union requests confirmation regarding the following matters:
- Was there a discrepancy between the explanation given at the time of signing the contract to outsourced parties and the actual willingness to pay and payment plan?
- What was the shared understanding and roles among the parties regarding contracts, operational instructions, payment decisions, and accounting procedures?
- Who manages the funds that enter a legal entity, and on what basis are they disbursed, and who ultimately receives them?
- Did the relationship between the nominally responsible person and the actual instigator change before and after the person returned home or was placed under arrest? Was there any change to hide the instigator or the beneficiaries?
Receiving a grant in itself does not mean that there is fraud; the result of non-payment alone does not prove fraud at the time of the contract. Therefore, it is necessary to investigate the entire process from the stage of seeking cooperation for the project, to the decision regarding the payment, and the subsequent disposal of the funds.
Furthermore, there is a difference between the change in the person in charge and the fact that the perpetrators of crimes are constantly changing. Instead of treating the staff of Shinseigo as members of a criminal organization as a whole, it is necessary to identify the individual acts and verify authority. Verification that places the responsibility for the entire business on those who performed auxiliary work as employees is insufficient.
Rather than concluding solely on the term “Tokryu,” the union requests confirmation of specific facts that can determine its relevance. Even if attention focuses on Nakano’s personal status, without insight into the decision-making and financial management of the organization, the question of whether there is an organized involvement cannot be answered.
Sir Nakano Keishi, the Shinsei Group, and public questioning by the relevant investigative agencies
The Inazaki Hospital Union requests specific explanations regarding the following matters: for the investigative agencies, for explanations that do not compromise the investigative secrecy or the rights of the parties involved, and for substantial verification by the competent authorities.
- Did Mr. Nakano speak to anyone about consulting with the Organized Crime Countermeasures Division? Please clarify the organizations/departments you contacted, the timing of your consultation, the purpose of the consultation, and the details of what you explained to them.
- During that meeting, did you explain your roles, contracts, and financial management at Shinseigai, Kamasachi Medical Services, PRC, and PRK, Inc.? If there is a record of questioning regarding these matters, please provide the relevant details to the extent possible.
- Is there any difference in the information that the arrest in Japan meant to avoid prosecution abroad? Please explain the background of that statement and its relationship to the actual information conveyed to the investigative agency.
- The Shinsei Association and its affiliated organizations changed their decision-making authority, account management, and method of approving contracts before and after Mr. Nakano’s return and detention. If so, please disclose the details, the person who made the changes, and the person or organization that took over the responsibility.
- What role did Mr. Ichiro Tanaka, Mr. Keita Nakano, and Ms. Mikiko Hoshizaki play in confirming the receipt of the grant and in deciding on the payment of salary, outsourced costs, and travel-related expenses? If any confirmation or instructions were given to Mr. Nakano, please explain the details and the decisions you made yourself.
- How will the two organizations respond to a report of unpaid invoices and non-response to requests for payment? Please indicate the legal entity responsible for the payment obligation, the amount subject to payment, the calculation basis, the payment schedule, and the person responsible for finalizing the resolution.
- If there is contact with the person, do the relevant investigative agencies check the contents of the consultation with the relevant documents or explanations from the parties? If there is specific information related to issues abroad and the management of domestic legal entities, are they taking measures to verify this through appropriate interdepartmental coordination?
- The Shingo Seikai and related organizations will preserve records of business instructions, decisions, contracts, deposits and withdrawals, and accounting procedures, and cooperate in fact-finding based on an independent position from the reporting entity. Please disclose the person responsible for investigation and corrective action.
These questions are not intended to accept the alleged contents of what Mr. Nakano said as the fact-finding by the investigative agencies. They are intended to examine the person’s explanation, the records of the entity, and the actual response. Rather than deciding the guilt or innocence of the crime based solely on the answers, we will proceed based on the facts that can be verified.
In addition to the management's person, please pay the salary and the agreed-upon amount.
The investigation into the issue surrounding the detainee and the resolution of the outstanding payment must proceed in parallel. While we wait for the criminal case to proceed, the lives and businesses of workers and their suppliers continue.
The text of Article 24, Paragraph 1 of the Labor Standards Act stipulates as follows:
Wages in currency must be paid directly to the workers in full.
The employer’s wage payment obligations do not disappear simply because the personal rights of the individual involved in management are restricted. The New Right Association requests that the union members’ contractual terms and work performance be reviewed and the unpaid wages be settled.
Regarding payments to outsourced parties and employees transferred to other companies, organize the debtors, performance details, and payment terms for each contract, and have the legal entity responsible for payment handle it. If you were previously responsible for sharing duties in a legal entity, you have a responsibility to explain that sharing, and that does not justify harassing the other party.
The union will organize records related to the members’ complaints and, if necessary, in collaboration with lawyers and the various parties involved, will consider filing criminal charges and complaints, as well as submitting damage claims. In doing so, it will not rely solely on the statements of the individuals involved; instead, it will provide specific details regarding contracts, instructions, payment decisions, and financial transactions, and identify the actions of each individual involved.
The individual rights of Nakano regarding criminal proceedings should be respected. At the same time, the preservation of documents as a legal entity, the fulfillment of contracts, and the continuation of business operations are tasks that should be handled by those with respective authority. The individual criminal proceedings should not be used as a pretext to stop the responsibilities that a legal entity should fulfill.
Even if one person is secured, the New Shoshi event will not be resolved.
Was Lord Nakano hoping that his detention abroad would provide an opportunity to avoid prosecution? This must be determined based on the context of the statement and his actual actions. However, just verifying this does not solve the problems faced by the employees and business partners of Shinseikai.
Who employed the person, who promised payment, who verified the deposit, and who disposed of the funds? How was that decision taken before and after the person returned home or was detained? The Shinseido Group needs to be asked to explain these management practices.
The union is not seeking to hold accountable the staff on the front lines who support community health and care. It is the judgment and responsibility of those with the authority to hire people, enter into contracts, and manage funds. To protect the work on the front lines, we must also consider the individual circumstances of those involved in management and the obligations of the organization.
If you were talking to the Organized Crime Countermeasure Department, please indicate what you discussed. If you were running the New Saigai business, please explain the instructions and decisions made. And if there are wages and payments to be paid, please proceed with resolving them.
Even if the identity of one person is revealed, the problem will not be resolved unless the location of the funds and the responsibility for payment remain unknown.