To Osaka District Court
From Yang, Si-Hun
Date May 8, 2006
Plaintiff Yang, Si-Hun
Place of Service of Documents ***** ***, Higashiosaka City,
Osaka-Prefecture 577-**** Japan
Tel 06-****-****
Fax 06-****-****
Defendant The Nobel Foundation
Marcus Storch, Chairman of the Board the Nobel Foundation
Address of the Defendant Sturegatan 14, SE-102 45 Stockholm, Sweden
Action for compensation for damages
Amount of damages 3 million yen
Amount of revenue stamps to be attached 20,000 yen
The Purpose of the Claims
The plaintiff seeks judgment on the following, as well as a declaration for provisional execution.
1. The defendant should pay 3 million yen as well as an amount of 5 % a year from the day after the delivery of this complaint until the day payment is completed.
2. Court costs should be borne by the defendant.
Grounds for the Claims
1. Parties
The complainant is a medical doctor who graduated from the Faculty of Medicine, Osaka University. While practicing medicine, he has personally made presentations on his research on life phenomena as a researcher in an interdisciplinary area. He made presentations titled “Life and Ethics” from 1981 through 1984, “Cognition, Value and the Foundation of Mathematics” in 1985, “Receptor-Complementarity, Form and Inclusion Relation-” in 1998, and “The Process of Searching and Trial, and the Form of Life” in 1999 in the Japan Association for Philosophy of Science.
These presentations can be summarized as follows. “In the fields of mathematics, the exponential curve is an unique existence which always keeps some kind of invariability. In the field of natural science, in all kinds of physicochemical reactions, the autocatalysis is the only reaction which can survive in the longest term. How can life phenomena be defined with these two propositions, based on the fundamental characters of number and value?”
The defendant is a juristic person who runs a prize that is said to have the highest international prestige in academic fields. The closed and secretive nature of its practice in the award selection process is well known.
2. Violation of the rights to privacy and the rights to control information regarding one’s own
Since more than ten years ago, there has been signs that personal information regarding the plaintiff is collected by the defendant in places such as the medical office that the plaintiff belongs to, which is believed to be related to the academic activities of the plaintiff described above. During this process, the plaintiff has never been asked by the defendant for consent for such information collection, be in an explicit or implicit manner. As the damage has become more obvious in recent years, the plaintiff has been trying countless times to contact the defendant directly and indirectly, which failed to elicit any response from the defendant.
3. It can be speculated that the information collection was initially aimed at academic evaluation and assessment, but it resulted in the provision and leakage of critical and sensitive information on the plaintiff to third parties through the defendant.
It is surmised that there were two channels for the provision and leakage of the information.
(1) The information that the defendant collected for genuine evaluation of the plaintiff’s academic achievement was leaked unintentionally, and was obtained and misused by a third party/parties.
(2) The defendant leaked the information intentionally by implying or suggesting without naming him in a way that the plaintiff can be identified.
One of the examples of the second channel is the fact that the international prize managed by the defendant was awarded to Japanese nationals for three consecutive years from the year 2000 to 2002(and two areas simultaneously in 2002). With these occasions, overt and covert approaches to the plaintiff’s privacy by the media, political organizations, public agencies and others became visible. Not a few of the approaches took form of negative exercise of influence and material and immaterial pressure. The frequency and the way such approaches are made became conspicuous day by day, leading to many serious and blatant human rights violations. The followings are some of the concrete examples of the human rights violations. The plaintiff was abruptly denied his job by his employer (for which the plaintiff filed Human Rights Redress with the Japan Federation of Bar Associations on October 5, 2004). He was told to move out of his residence for no good reason (Dispossession Proceeding, Case Number Heisei 16(wa) 4443 Osaka District court and it appellate trial, Case Number Heisei 17(ne) 276 Osaka High Court). He experienced continuous incidents of environmental pollution that show no sign of slowing down. (Damage Suits, Case Numbers Heisei 17(wa) 365 and Heisei18 (wa) 3562, Osaka District Court).
4. The defendant’s policy to operate the award
Contrary to the glorious front stage of the international award operated by the defendant, the closed nature of its selection process has been pointed out on many occasions. A literature points out “the facts regarding the selection process of the Nobel Prize are kept in strict confidence and the confidentiality obligation remains in force for 50 years. While all of the records and materials regarding the selection process are stored securely in the archive of each academy, access to the data is limited, even after 50 years of the confidentiality obligation, to permitted researchers in such areas as science history.” (Toru Yano, “Nobel Prize-Universal Language of the Twentieth Century”)
This policy of the defendant in operating the award is no longer compatible with the universally recognized basic rights for the respect of individuals and legislations on data protection which uphold the rights of the data subjects. Therefore, it was inevitable that its gaps and problems come into the open sooner or later. The damage suffered by the plaintiff was an inevitable consequence of the institutional flaw of the defendant.
5. The plaintiff who had been leading a relatively smooth life as a physician sustained a significant damage as his daily life was disrupted seriously. Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the complainant for the damage according to the Article 709 of the Civil Code (delicit). Please note that the claims in this written complaint covers only a part of the damage sustained by the complainant.
6. The applicable law and international jurisdiction
This case falls under the so called conflict of laws case on violation of right of personality, and the applicable law, according to the private international law, Article 11 of the Act Governing the Application of Laws, is the law of the land in which the fact causing the wrongful act of violation of the right of personality arose (lex loci delicti ). Regarding international jurisdictions, provisions regarding territorial jurisdiction according to the Code of Civil Procedure are applied correspondingly, and among those, on actions on tort, the place of commission of the wrongful act is admitted as special jurisdiction, therefore, the plaintiff seeks the trial on the points set forth in the purpose of this action in the court of the place of commission of the wrongful act. (For reference, there is a similar case, in which a doctor operating his business in this country brought action against Time, Inc., a publisher of weekly magazines in English, which has its headquarters in the United States, for the wrongful act of defamation.(Tokyo District Court Case, 59th year of Showa (1984)(wa)No.2287, claims for damages, publication of retraction.)
Attachment
1. A copy of the Written Complaint
Statement to Amend Claims
Plaintiff Yang, Si-Hun
Defendant The Nobel Foundation
January 7, 2008
To 16th Civil Section 1C, Osaka District Court
Plaintiff in the above case : Yang, Si Hun
Regarding the case Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No. 4497 Claims for Damages case between the above parties, the plaintiff additionally amends hereby the purpose and cause for the claims as follows. At the same time, the plaintiff changes the title of the case to the action for compensation for damages and for disclosure of information.
The Amendment of the Purpose of the Claims
1. The defendant should pay 100 million yen as well as an amount of 5% a year from the day after the delivery of the complaint until the day payment is completed.
2. The defendant should disclose all information regarding the plaintiff that it holds to the plaintiff.
3. Court costs should be borne by the defendant.
The Amendment of the Cause of the Claims
The following is added to the cause of the claims.
1. The claims are expanded within the extent the plaintiff can bear the cost of revenue stamps to be attached. However, because the case is still ongoing, the whole extent of the damages suffered by the plaintiff is still unclear, if the plaintiff were to claim compensation for all of the damages suffered, the cost of revenue stamps will be so high, it will put pressure on the plaintiff’s life and also for other reasons, the plaintiff cannot as yet claim compensation for all of the damages suffered.
2. As mentioned in the “On the procedures for service of suit” (dated May 15, 2006) submitted to the court immediately after filing this suit, the plaintiff had expected that the defendant would be prepared to respond to the case. But the reaction of the defendant was unexpected. The plaintiff, who was pressed for time, had to request notification of a place for service of documents within Japan to avoid delay in the proceedings. For that purpose, the plaintiff sent the letter “On the notification of place of service” (dated May 25, 2006) (Evidence Item Ko No.1) and “On the procedure for notification of place of service, etc.” (dated June 22, 2006) (Evidence Item Ko No.2) by EMS mail to the defendant, as well as the copies of the Written Complaint, but these were returned without reason, and therefore, the plaintiff had to send them again by facsimile. Since then, similar applications have been repeated ( for example, “On the Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages case” dated September 24, 2006 (Evidence Item Ko No.3)), but during the period of over one and half years, although there were several occasions when there was a vague feelings that the defendant might have sent the notification of the place of service, it could not be confirmed at the Court. Meanwhile, as was mentioned in the “Request” dated July 23, 2007 (Evidence Item Ko No.4), the plaintiff had to put in repeated requests against approaches outside the court, presumably from the defendant. In the end, on December 5, 2007, the plaintiff sent a confirmation e-mail to the defendant (Evidence Item Ko No.5), and telephoned the defendant directly to request a response to the notification of place for service. The response was “We have no comment.”
3. To make a frank judgment from the response in this case seen in the above developments, it cannot be believed that the defendant is fulfilling its responsibilities appropriate to its position in the international community. As a result of the defendant’s ambiguous attitude towards the plaintiff’s request of notification of place for service in Japan to cover for the defect in international judicial procedures, the case has been stalling in the stage before the service of suit, and the hearings have not yet been initiated. As the service of the complaints and other documents based on voluntary acceptance according to Article 5 paragraph 2 of the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra-judicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters has been refused by the defendant for the reason that these were not translated into Swedish, and therefore failed, it seems apparent that the defendant is trying to avoid hearings under the judiciary. Then how is the defendant trying to solve this dispute? The huge question remains. Apart from this, particularly amazing was the fact that the defendant, who is in a position of assessing the results of intellectual activities, which are nothing other than the products of individuals, is, however it doesn’t appear on the surface, actually engaged in behavior that must be seen as denying the rights of individuals including privacy, subjectivity of the individual and the right of self-determination. The informal information activities of the defendant are by its nature difficult to ascertain in terms of facts, but when at least sensitive information regarding an individual that was obtained through such activities is not disclosed to that individual, the intentions, rights and interests of that individual remains forgotten. Unless the defendant returns to the basics of human rights, and treat information on individuals appropriately, the whole case including this cannot be solved. Yet the defendant gives the impression that it stubbornly persists in its internal formal arrangements and failed to work towards realistic and positive solution of the problem.
4. It seems that instead of respecting the right of access to information or self-determination of the individual concerned, the defendant is trying to respond by various unilateral manipulative measures in mostly information and psychological areas. But it has become clear that with such measures, the problem will grow larger instead of move towards a solution. In any kind of case, unless you have accurate information, no one can make appropriate decisions. The plaintiff believes, that unless there is an effort to disseminate widely about the case, and clear and certain communication of intent and information between the relevant people and parties, based on such reflection, are held, a key to the solution of this case, which seems to involve many people, who should not have been directly involved in the first place, will not be found.
5. As the result of the inappropriate treatment of personal information regarding the plaintiff collected without the plaintiff’s permission, the plaintiff is suffering from the damages listed in the suit and other documents. Yet despite the plaintiff’s requests, the defendant has not disclosed this information even to the plaintiff himself. To prevent further increase in damages not confined to just the plaintiff, the plaintiff hereby claims disclosure of the information as given in the second purpose of the claims.
Method of Proof
1. Evidence Item Ko No.1 “On the Notification of Place for Service” (dated May 25, 2006)
2. Evidence Item Ko No.2 “On the Procedure for Notification of Place for service,etc.” (dated June 22, 2006)
3. Evidence Item Ko No.3 “On the Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages case” (dated September 24, 2006)
4. Evidence Item Ko No.4 “Request” (dated July 23, 2007)
5. Evidence Item Ko No.5 e-mail dated December 5, 2007“Confirmation regarding Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No. 4497 Claims for Damages case”
6. Evidence Item Ko No.6 Translation of Evidence Item Ko No.5
Attached documents
1. Evidence Item Ko (copy) 1 each
Evidence Item Ko（甲） No.1
To the Nobel Foundation
On the Notification of Place for Service
On May 8, 2006, I have filed a civil suit for claiming damages at Osaka District Court against your foundation. The case number is Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages case, and registered under the 16th Civil Section 1C of Osaka District Court. The secretary in charge is ＊＊＊＊ ＊＊＊＊, the judge of the case is ＊＊＊ ＊＊＊＊. The address, etc. of the court is as follows.
2-1-10 Nishi Tenma, Kita-ku Osaka City 530-8522
Osaka District Court
16th Civil Section 1C
Tel (main) 06(6363) ****
Fax (16th Civil Section) 06(6363) ****
For smooth service of suit and other procedures, please fill in the address of the place (within Japan) to receive the service of documents in the form attached and notify the court accordingly. After receiving the notification, all documents issued by the court regarding this case will be sent to the address. Therefore, if you wish to change the address, please notify the court of the change using the same form.
May 25, 2006
Plaintiff ***** ***, Higashiosaka City, Osaka Prefecture
Yang, Si-Hun
Tel 06 **** ****
Fax 06 **** ****
e-mail: ****** ** *** ** **
Notification of Place for Service of Documents
Case No. Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages
Case
Place for Service
Recipient of Service
Relationship between the Defendant and Place for Service
Date
Defendant
Seal
To: 16th Civil Section 1C, Osaka District Court
Evidence Item Ko（甲） No.2
To the Nobel Foundation
On the Procedure for Notification of Place for Service, etc.
More than a month has passed since I have filed a suit against your foundation. During this time, I spoke about three times with the secretary responsible for this case, and the secretary’s view was that there seemed to be no particular problem with the conditions of the suit. But it seems that the procedures have been stalling in the stage before the service of complaint, which is done ex officio by the court in Japan. If you could notify the place for service of documents that I requested before, or as far as I have inquired, if the court receives an indication of the intent to put in an appearance from the defendant, we can proceed with the procedures to serve the complaint. I would be grateful if you could inform me if you should take either of the steps.
I enclose herewith the documents I intend to submit or send this week on two of the items that I listed on the complaint. The situation has not stopped, and it is getting more serious. I must ask for immediate response.
I repeat the case numbers and other items herewith. Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages Case, under the 16th Civil Section 1C, the secretary responsible is ＊＊ ＊＊, the judge responsible for the case is ＊＊＊ ＊＊＊＊. The court’s address, etc. are as follows.
I ask for your kind cooperation.
2-1-10 Nishi Tenma, Kita-ku Osaka City 530-8522
Osaka District Court
16th Civil Section 1C
Tel (main) 06(6363) ****
Fax (16th Civil Section) 06(6363) ****
June 22, 2006
Plaintiff ***** ***, Higashiosaka City, Osaka Prefecture
Yang, Si-Hun
Tel 06 **** ****
Fax 06 **** ****
e-mail: ****** ** *** ** **
Evidence Item Ko（甲） No.3
To the Nobel Foundation
On Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages Case
Regarding the above, the second batch of documents sent by EMS to you on June 22 was returned to me after having been left at the post office for a month, as had been the first EMS mail to your foundation. I have re-sent the first batch by Facsimile, and this time I am enclosing the second batch of documents. The contents of both letters are the same, regarding the notification of place for service as well as appearing in court for the suit I have filed. As a result of the second letter being returned for some incomprehensible reason, I have lost valuable couple of months in the most important period. About the notification of place for service of documents, as I have confirmed with the secretary in charge of the case on July 18 of this year before the summer recess, there have been no notification from your foundation. Since then, there has been no progress in the matter.
I believe that the source as well as the outline of the whole case has gradually become clear through these developments. While many unrelated people are being drawn into this matter, the unstable and tense situation for the people close to me has been continuing for a considerable period of time. It is no longer just my problem, but I find myself now in a position of being asked to take responsibility. Because of this situation, whatever circumstances there may be, I cannot retreat from my sensible and reasonable complaint and argument to request to have the rights and interest I have lost recovered according to law. As time is limited, I must ask your foundation to make your intentions clear regarding this matter.
I ask again for your understanding and cooperation on this matter.
September 24, 2006
***** ***, Higashiosaka City, Osaka Prefecture 577-****
Yang, Si-Hun
Tel 06 **** ****
Evidence Item Ko（甲） No.4
To the Nobel Foundation
Request
On the matter of Osaka District Court Heisei 18 (wa) No.4497 Claims for Damages Case, that I have filed, there seems to be various informal movements that are not clearly visible on the surface. Some of them seem to be approaches from your foundation to me, but as I do not have to repeat, I, myself and your foundation are plaintiff and defendant regarding this case, and such approaches and events may have some influence on the fair proceedings of the court. I hereby send this request to ask you to give particular consideration on this matter.
July 23, 2007
***** ***, Higashiosaka City, Osaka Prefecture 577-****
Plaintiff of the above case: Yang Si-Hun
Tel 06 **** ****
Fax 06 **** ****
e-mail: ****** ** *** ** **
Evidence Item Ko（甲） No.５
件名: Confirmation about the civil case 2006(wa)No.4497, Osaka District Court
送信日時: 2007年12月5日水曜日 20:11
差出人: Yang, Si Hun
宛先:
CC:
テーマ Confirmation about the civil case 2006(wa)No.4497, Osaka District Court
December 5, 2007
Dr. Marcus Storch
Chairman
The Nobel Foundation
Sturegatan 14
SE-102 45 Stockholm
Sweden
Dear Dr. Marcus Storch:
As you know very well, one and a half years have passed since the above suit was filed. I have already sent you enough information on this case though we are still in a serious situation in which even communication is not easy.
"About the offer of a place for service"(dated 05/25/2006, sent by fax on 07/09/2006. It was sent by EMS, but returned.)
"About the formalities of informing a place for service, etc."(dated 06/22/2006,sent by registered mail on 09/29/2006,by fax on 10/15/2006, 05/30/2007. EMS was returned.)
"About the damage-claim case 2006(wa)No.4497, Osaka District Court"(dated 09/24/2006, sent by registered mail on 09/29/2006,by fax on 10/15/2006.)
"Complaint"(dated 05/08/2006, sent by fax on 07/09/2006. EMS was returned)
"Request"(dated 07/23/2007, sent by fax on 07/23/2007, 09/18/2007, 10/02.2007, sent by registered mail on 09/16/2007.)
"About the civil suit in Osaka District Court"(dated 11/08/2007, sent to Ambassador of Sweden to Japan by e-mail and by registered mail on 11/09/2007, 11/12/2007.)
Unfortunately, your response has not been confirmed yet. I think I have the right to confirm your position on this matter. I must ask you one simple question in this mail. Please answer clearly yes or no.
The question is " Has your foundation ever informed Osaka District Court of a place (or an agent) in Japan for service of documents? "
I am looking forward to your prompt reply.
Yours Sincerely,
Yang, Si Hun
Yang, Si Hun
***** ***
Higashiosaka City, OSAKA
577-**** JAPAN
Tel : +81-6-**** ****
Fax : +81-6-**** ****
E-mail : ****** ** *** ** **
