[Hyogo] Governor Saito Motohiko asks personnel authorities if it is possible to take disciplinary action against the employee who made the allegations “without waiting for the investigation results to be completed”
In relation to the issue of Hyogo Prefecture Governor Saito Motohiko receiving an internal whistleblower’s allegations of power harassment, it has been revealed that immediately after the whistleblower, a male employee who was the former director of the Nishi Harima Prefectural Civil Affairs Bureau (who died in July), used the prefecture’s public interest whistleblowing system, the governor instructed personnel authorities to consider taking disciplinary action against the man as soon as possible. At a closed-door hearing by the Prefectural Assembly’s Article 100 Committee on the 23rd, a personnel official testified in detail about the circumstances that led to the disciplinary action. In mid-March, the man sent a document of accusations to media outlets and others, pointing out seven allegations against the governor. On April 4th, the same information was reported internally using the prefecture’s whistleblowing system. According to those in attendance at the 100-Article Committee, the employees who appeared as witnesses testified that, as personnel authorities, they expressed the view that “disciplinary action must await the results of the investigation (into the allegations) based on the public interest whistleblower report.” The governor had agreed to the request, but in mid-April, through the then Director General of the General Affairs Department, he approached the personnel authorities asking whether it was possible to take disciplinary action without waiting for the results of the investigation (into the public interest whistleblower investigation). After the personnel department received the opinion from a lawyer that it was “legally possible,” the general affairs department director and others instructed that disciplinary action be prioritized. On May 7, personnel authorities imposed a three-month suspension on the man as disciplinary action. At the time the governor ordered the review of disciplinary action in mid-April, it was discovered that prefectural officials had received luxury coffee makers and other items from a company that had been identified in an internal whistleblower case, and had then returned them after the whistleblower report was filed. The employee who appeared at the hearing reportedly said about the governor’s rush to take disciplinary action, “I heard the governor say, ’If I take disciplinary action, the wind (of criticism against me) might change.’” 2024/08/25 05:00 Yomiuri Shimbun Online.
How Saito will make a big comeback from here: “The LDP will not punish those with slush funds of less than 5 million yen. I’ll make a few hundred thousand at most, so it’s clearly not worth quitting.”
“Is it possible to take action without waiting for the results of the investigation (into the public interest report)?” they asked. >The personnel department received an opinion from a lawyer that it was “legally possible,” and so the general affairs department director and others instructed that disciplinary action be prioritized. Even if it’s legal, I feel like it’s still pretty dangerous (´･ω･`).
The reason why the Ishin Party can’t let go is because there is a theory that other Ishin Party members were also involved in the death of the employee who made the accusation.
Comments