Japanese prosecutors’ view: “Except for drunk driving, even fatal accidents are not considered dangerous driving.”
– Asserts that running at speed of 194 Km on a public road and causing a fatal accident is not dangerous. –
On Feb 9th 2021, a 2 vehicles collision occurred in Oita City. It was a right-turning-straight-ahead collision accident in which a straight-ahead vehicle collides with a right-turning vehicle. The driver of a right-turning vehicle died in the accident.
From the previous discussion/articles, it can be understood that there was no issue (green light) regarding the traffic light at the time of the accident, and that the intersection allows both going straight and turning right.
According to Japan’s Road Traffic Act in such a situation, the vehicle going straight basically has priority, so the right-turning vehicle must check the presence and distance of the straight-ahead vehicle and turn right only after being sure of its safety.
Road Traffic Act, Article 37
SOURCE: JAPAN LAW TRANSLATION(2022/10/08)
When turning right at an intersection, a vehicle, etc. shall not obstruct the progress of another vehicle, etc. that are going straight or turning left at the intersection.
HTTPS://WWW.JAPANESELAWTRANSLATION.GO.JP/JA/LAWS/VIEW/2962#JE_CH3SC1AT1
However, this accident was not a simple right-turning-straight-ahead collision accident. The straight-ahead vehicle was running at an unimaginable speed of 194 km/h. Moreover, the accident did not take place on a highway. So, it was on a public road with pedestrians and bicycles.
As you know, 194 Km/h is the speed at which a vehicle can move a distance of 194 kilometers in one hour. In other words, it moves about 3.28 kilometers in just one minute and about 539 meters in just 10 seconds.
Who would assume that there are vehicles moving at 194 Km/h on a public road ?
The right-turning vehicle should confirm the presence and distance of the straight-ahead vehicles. However, in this case, the headlights of this straight-ahead vehicle would appear to be quite far away even after confirming the straight-ahead vehicle. And it is believed that the right-turning vehicle turned right after judging that it was safe.
Probably the straight-ahead vehicle must have been looked like a missile.
This time, everyone believed that Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Injury would be applied.
The act on Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Injury was enacted after an accident in which two girls died by a drunk driver, as the Road Traffic Law could not deal with such a vicious accident.
However, the decision issued by Oita prosecutors determined that this accident was not applicable of the act on Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Injury, but rather it was applied the act on Negligent Driving Causing Death or Injury.
Why did Oita prosecutors determine that it was not applicable of the act on Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Injury ?
Family members of right-turning vehicle said about the explanation of Oita prosecutors at the press conference, “The straight-ahead vehicle was controlled straight until the collision, which means that the driver was able to control the motor vehicle, so it was not applicable of the act on Dangerous Driving Causing Death or Injury. If for example the vehicle could not turn a corner, this would be evidence of dangerous driving causing death.”
In addition to this, they got the explanation “there is a possibility of probation for a first-time offender”
From this explanation, Oita prosecutors must have decided that priority should be given to the straight-ahead vehicle even if it was an unimaginable speeding violation, and that this fatal accident was unavoidable because the right-turning vehicle failed to confirm the speed of the straight-ahead vehicle.
Negligent Driving Causing Death or Injury, Article 5.
SOURCE: JAPAN LAW TRANSLATION(2022/10/08)
A person who fails to exercise the due care required in driving a motor vehicle and thereby causes the death or injury of another is subject to punishment by imprisonment with or without work for not more than 7 years or a fine of not more than 1,000,000 yen; provided, however, that the person may be granted an absolute discharge in the light of circumstances if the injury is minor.
HTTPS://WWW.JAPANESELAWTRANSLATION.GO.JP/JA/LAWS/VIEW/2965
The following is an excerpt from the Act on Punishment of Acts Inflicting Death or Injury on Others by Driving a Motor Vehicle, etc.
Oita prosecutors must have determined that the following did not apply.
(ii)an act of driving at such high speed that it is exceedingly difficult for the person to control the motor vehicle;
SOURCE: Japan Law Translation(2022/10/08)
(iii)an act of driving when the person lacks the skills to control the motor vehicle;
https://www.japaneselawtranslation.go.jp/ja/laws/view/2965
Oita prosecutors judged that even if the straight-ahead vehicle was running an unimaginable speed as 194Km/h, this driver has the driving skill to stop in front of the stop line when the traffic light turns red and to stop without colliding even if the front car puts on the brakes.
By the way, in the case of a car moving at 194km/h, the stopping distance should be around 300 meters even if it is assumed that the tire is very good condition on a dry road surface.
Since the vehicle moves about 269 meters in 5 seconds at 194Km/h, the driver must predict and put on the brake 6 seconds of more before the traffic light turns red.
Oita prosecutors will urgently need to prove that a car moving at 194Km/h can be controlled correctly without causing an accident even if it stops at a traffic light turns red or a front car put on the brakes suddenly.
I believed that traffic laws such as the Road Traffic Act were enacted based on scientific evidence to prevent accidents, we end up thinking that that these laws were enacted for the purpose of obtaining budget (penalties) without any evidence from Oita prosecutors judgment this time.
If there is any objection to this opinion, it should be proved that it can be correctly controlled at a speed of 194Km/h on a public road.
It is a dangerous situation that the judgment of the administrative branch (prosecutors office is one of the administrative branch) differs so much from the public’s understanding.
Diet members as the legislative branch, should not only revise the relevant laws, but also raise the issue to prove to Oita prosecutors that it can be safely controlled at 194 km/h on a public road.
Unfortunately, the current Diet members seem to be more concerned about the state funeral of former Prime Minister Abe and the Unification Church issue than this issue.
Reference: (In Japanese)YAHOO JAPAN News[Mika Yanagihara] (2022/10/05)
https://news.yahoo.co.jp/byline/yanagiharamika/20220815-00310294
Reference: (In Japanese) NHK NES WEB(2022/10/06)
https://www3.nhk.or.jp/lnews/oita/20220815/5070013459.html
Reference: (In aYomiuri Shinbun Online
https://www.yomiuri.co.jp/national/20221009-OYT1T50047/
Thanks.
2022/10/09