The “Old Media” shows its tense coverage of Shinji Ishimaru’s alleged violation of the Public Election Law and “the real popularity of Ishimaru

1,128 people applied for the first round of candidates

Shinji Ishimaru, 42, who was the runner-up to Governor Yuriko Koike, 72, in last July’s Tokyo gubernatorial election, is in a cloud of doubt. A citizens’ group filed criminal charges against him on February 10 for alleged violation of the Public Offices Election Law, and on February 25, a university professor reportedly sent a complaint to the Tokyo District Public Prosecutors Office.

In preparation for the June 22 Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly elections, Ishimaru established a regional political party, “Rebirth Path,” and at a press conference held on February 26, he revealed that 1,128 people had applied for the first round of publicly solicited candidates.

The party intends to field candidates in all 42 electoral districts, and up to 60 candidates will be selected by around April after screening of documents and interviews.

Amid these circumstances, Ishimaru himself came under suspicion of violating the Public Election Law.

A “Shukan Bunshun” (weekly newspaper) and other media reported on a campaign rally held during last year’s gubernatorial election, and revealed that a cancellation fee of 977,350 yen had been paid to the production company, yet distribution work was carried out on the day of the rally. In response, criminal charges were filed against Ishimaru, and if the charges are accepted, he may be subject to investigation.

We had heard that Mr. Ishimaru was going to hold a press conference on the 11th, the day after the criminal charges were filed, but that was dropped. It seems that he learned at that time that Bunshun was carrying a follow-up report on the alleged violation of the Public Election Law. Ishimaru’s usual relaxed demeanor was gone.

At a “reorganization” press conference held on February 21, Ishimaru said

At a “reorganized” press conference on February 21, Ishimaru denied any involvement, saying, “It was not my idea to hold the rally, so I never had any intention to hold it in the first place.

He denied his own involvement. He denied that he was involved in the planning of the rally, saying, “It was not my idea.

I was aware that although the name “personnel expenses” was included in the estimate, it did not include actual expenses, so I was allowed to change it. If the person in charge said that with the intention of paying personnel expenses, that would be an illegal act, but that is not acceptable to the election campaign headquarters. （The person in charge also said that he had no intention to do so.

The person in charge also said that he had no intention to do so.