Press Conference by the Chief Cabinet Secretary(Excerpt)PM

Q&As
・The issues related to the special intelligence protection bill and the National Security Council
・The issue related to media report of a Japanese official interrogated by the Republic of Korea for allegedly spying
・The issues related to the Air Defense Identification Zone established by China.

(Abridged)　

REPORTER: I would like to ask a question concerning the relationship between the special intelligence protection bill and the National Security Council (NSC). The special intelligence protection bill stipulates that it is to be enforced within one year of its enactment and promulgation. However, I believe that you have always said that the NSC would only be able to operate effectively if the bill is enforced. Until the bill is enforced, the NSC will be operating without the bill being in effect. What are your thoughts on this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: We have successfully enacted the NSC bill and we are presently in the final stages of having the special intelligence protection bill passed. There is a one year gap between these two bills coming into effect, and, honestly speaking, it is my belief that the smaller the gap, the better. Nevertheless, until the special intelligence protection bill enters into effect, we will initiate the NSC bill in its own right, and work with what we have.

REPORTER: In relation to the special intelligence protection bill, Minister Mori has also expressed her intention to establish a variety of new third-party organizations for oversight. In reality, though, am I right to understand that although the law grants a one year period, you will still strive to undertake the necessary preparations and establish the third-party organizations as soon as possible?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: We have one year before the legislation is effective. I understand that Minister Mori meant that she will try to establish such organizations by that time. In any case, I believe that she meant that she will strive to establish third-party organizations sometime before the legislation comes into effect.

REPORTER: It has been reported in media that a male official of Japan's Cabinet Intelligence and Research Office was interrogated by the Republic of Korea's (ROK) National Intelligence Service for allegedly spying in the ROK in May this year. Could you share with us the facts of the situation?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: There is no truth to the reports that an official conducted intelligence gathering operations in the ROK and was subsequently deported.

REPORTER: Is it true that an official of the Cabinet Intelligence and Research Office was in the ROK and voluntarily left the country or something along those lines?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: There was no incident involving an official conducting intelligence gathering operations in the ROK, and no one was subsequently deported.

(Abridged)　

REPORTER: I would like to ask a question concerning China's East China Sea Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ). According to the U.S. Government, when Vice President Joe Biden met with President Xi Jinping, the Vice President asked China to stop enforcing the ADIZ. How does the Government view the fact that rather than asking China to revoke the zone, the U.S.Vice President asked China to stop enforcing the ADIZ?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: Frankly speaking, I think that the Japanese Government should not comment on how exactly Vice President Biden referred to the issue. That said, I know that overall Vice President Biden conveyed to Chinese President Xi Jinping that the U.S. cannot accept the ADIZ announced by China, and that it has grave concerns.

REPORTER: When Prime Minister Abe and Vice President Biden met, I understand that Vice President Biden expressed his view that crisis management mechanisms are necessary. How is the Japanese Government planning to address this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: In any case, as the Japanese Government has maintained, the door for dialogue is always open and we will address this issue based on this stance.

REPORTER: This is a matter that has been discussed for some time now. Some people point out that asking China to cease enforcement of the ADIZ, or pursuing crisis management mechanisms, rather than asking them to revoke the ADIZ, will ultimately end up legitimizing China's actions. What are your thoughts on this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I do not believe that is true at all. I do not think for one moment that it is unreasonable for Japanese and Chinese defense leaders, for example, to pursue such mechanisms to avoid unintended conflicts. I view this as a very reasonable course of action. I also believe that this will not lead to legitimizing China's ADIZ.

REPORTER: Returning to the topic of the special intelligence protection bill, during yesterday's press conference you referred to the case of the Act on Wiretapping for Criminal Investigation. If the special intelligence protection bill is enacted, do you believe that public understanding will increase as time passes?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I referred to the act during yesterday’s press conference. I was part of the Committee on Judicial Affairs when we were attempting to have the bill for the Act on Wiretapping for Criminal Investigation passed. I understand there have been a number of opposition protests in the vicinity of the Diet building, but back then, opposition was much stronger. However, when the bill was finally enacted and by the time it came into effect, the concerns held by many people had completely evaporated. On this occasion as well, we are confident that if we provide the people with solid explanations about the bill in the lead up to its enactment and gain their understanding, so as to ensure that no one feels anxious, the bill is nothing to be worried about. Furthermore, we believe that given the extremely severe security environment that Japan finds itself in, the bill is critically important in facilitating cooperation with our allies and other nations, in order to ensure the security of the lives and property of the people, and of Japan itself. We are convinced that the people will certainly understand this.

REPORTER: This was raised earlier, but in relation to the special intelligence protection bill, there is an approximate one year period before the special intelligence protection bill must be enforced, which means that there will be a maximum gap of one year between the enforcement of the special intelligence protection bill and the NSC bill. Regarding this gap, I understand that essentially, these two bills will only work if both are implemented. Do you have any concerns in this regard?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: The absolute ideal scenario would have been if we were able to implement the two bills together. However, even as things stand, Japan is, in reality at present, addressing its security issues as best it can. Nevertheless, the fact of the matter is that it is very challenging for us to obtain high quality intelligence from our allies. There insufficient penalties in place, and in light of this, I think that, in the end, it is important that we make appropriate efforts to overcome these hurdles.

REPORTER: I would like to ask a question concerning the Information Security Oversight Division  for the special intelligence protection bill. Earlier, you stated that after the public has gained an understanding for the bill, their concerns will be allayed. I believe that the Information Security Oversight Division will serve as a checking mechanism for addressing concerns that arbitrary decisions may be made regarding the designation of special intelligence. Am I right to understand that the Information Security Oversight Division will have the authority to determine when designations of intelligence deviate from the set standards?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: That was raised in an earlier question in relation to the comments made by Minister Mori today, and I answered that we plan to create a transparent organization. For that very reason, I think that the office would naturally have greater authority, and therefore, it will naturally have the authority to determine when designations of intelligence deviate from the set standards.