Testimony about 'forcible taking away of women on Jeju Island': Judged to be fabrication because supporting evidence not found
2014年8月22日10時00分
https://www.asahi.com/articles/SDI201408213563.html
Question: There was a man who testified in books and meetings that he had used violence to forcibly take away women on the Korean Peninsula, which was Japan's colony, to make them serve as comfort women during the war. The Asahi Shimbun ran articles about the man from the 1980s until the early 1990s. However, some people have pointed out that his testimony was a fabrication.
* * *
The man's name was Seiji Yoshida. In his books and on other occasions, he said that he headed the mobilization section at the Shimonoseki branch of the Yamaguchi Prefectural Romu Hokokukai labor organization that was in control of day laborers.
The Asahi Shimbun has run, as far as it can confirm, at least 16 articles about Yoshida. The first appeared in the Sept. 2, 1982, morning edition in the city news page published by the Osaka head office. The article was about a speech that he gave in Osaka in which he said, "I 'hunted up' 200 young Korean women on Jeju Island."
The reporter, 66, who wrote the article, was in the City News Section at the Osaka head office at that time.
The reporter said, "I had absolutely no doubts about the contents of his talk because it was very specific and detailed."
In the early 1990s, other newspapers also ran articles about what Yoshida said at meetings and on other occasions.
In the April 30, 1992, morning edition of the Sankei Shimbun, an article raised doubts about Yoshida's testimony based on the results of an investigation conducted by Ikuhiko Hata on Jeju. Weekly magazines also began publishing articles pointing to "Suspicion of 'fabrication.'"
A reporter, 53, in the City News Section at the Tokyo head office was instructed by his editor to meet with Yoshida immediately after the Sankei article ran. The reporter asked Yoshida to introduce relevant individuals and submit data to corroborate his testimony, but the reporter said Yoshida rejected the request.
During news gathering to prepare for the March 31, 1997, special coverage, Yoshida refused to meet with a reporter, 57, in the City News Section at the Tokyo head office. When the reporter asked over the phone about reports that suspected the testimony was a fabrication, Yoshida responded, "I wrote about my experiences as they were."
Although news gathering was also conducted on Jeju and no corroborating evidence could be obtained, the special coverage said "no confirmation has been made about the authenticity" because there was no conclusive proof that Yoshida's testimony was false. The Asahi has not written about Yoshida since.
However, in November 2012, Shinzo Abe, who was then president of the Liberal Democratic Party, said at a debate among party leaders hosted by the Japan National Press Club, "The problem has become much bigger because false reporting by The Asahi Shimbun has led to the spreading of a book throughout Japan, which has been taken as fact, even though it was created by a man named Seiji Yoshida who is like a con man."
Some newspapers and magazines have repeated criticism of The Asahi Shimbun.
In April and May 2014, The Asahi Shimbun interviewed a total of about 40 people in their late 70s to 90s living on Jeju. However, no evidence was obtained that supported the writings by Yoshida about forcible taking away.
In a town on the northwestern part of the island where Yoshida claimed to have taken away several dozens of women working at a plant making dried fish, there was only one factory in the village that handled fish. The son of the local man who was involved in factory management, now deceased, said, "Only canned products were made there. I never heard from my father about women workers being taken away."
Yoshida wrote that the factory roof was "thatched." Video images that captured conditions at that time were obtained by Norifumi Kawahara, a professor of historical geography at Ritsumeikan University who has conducted research on the fishing industry in South Korea at that time. The images showed the roof to be made of tin and tile.
In June 1993, Kang Jeong-suk, a former researcher at the Korean Research Institute for Chongshindae, conducted research on Jeju based on the writings of Yoshida. "I heard from several elderly people at each of the locations I visited, but I did not come across any testimony that matched the writings," Kang said.
Yoshida wrote in his book he went to Jeju in May 1943 based on a mobilization order from the Western District Army. He also wrote that the contents of the order were left in the diary of his wife (now deceased). However, Yoshida's oldest son, 64, was interviewed for this special coverage, and it was learned that the wife never kept a diary. The son said Yoshida died in July 2000.
When Yoshida met in May 1993 with Yoshiaki Yoshimi, a Chuo University professor, and others, Yoshida explained that "there were occasions when I changed the dates and locations (where he forcibly took the women)." Moreover, Yoshida refused to present the diary in which the contents of the mobilization order were contained. That led Yoshimi to point out, "I had no choice but to confirm that we could not use his testimony." (Note 1)
Masaru Tonomura, an associate professor at the University of Tokyo who is knowledgeable about mobilization matters on the Korean Peninsula during the war, said the Romu Hokokukai that Yoshida claimed he worked for was created through instructions given by the Health and Welfare Ministry as well as the Home Ministry.
"Given the chain of command, it is inconceivable for the military to issue the mobilization order, and for employees to go directly to the Korean Peninsula," Tonomura said.
Yoshida also explained that in May 1943, when he claimed to have forcibly taken away the women, the "Army unit headquarters" "maintained military rule" on Jeju. Regarding that point, Kazu Nagai, a professor of modern and contemporary Japanese history at Kyoto University, pointed out that documents of the former Army showed that a large Army force only gathered on Jeju after April 1945.
"The contents of his writing cannot be considered to be true," Nagai said.
Note 1: Yoshiaki Yoshimi and Fumiko Kawata, compilers, " 'Jugun Ianfu' wo Meguru 30 no Uso to Shinjutsu" (30 lies and truths surrounding 'military comfort women') (Otsuki Shoten 1997)
To our readers
We have made the judgment that the testimony that Yoshida forcibly took away comfort women on Jeju was a fabrication. We retract our articles on him. We were unable to uncover the falseness of his testimony at the time the articles were published. Although additional research was conducted on Jeju, we were unable to obtain any information that corroborated his testimony. Interviews with researchers have also turned up a number of contradictions regarding the core elements of his testimony.
「済州島で連行」証言 裏付け得られず虚偽と判断
2014年8月5日05時00分
https://www.asahi.com/articles/ASG7L71S2G7LUTIL05N.html
〈疑問〉日本の植民地だった朝鮮で戦争中、慰安婦にするため女性を暴力を使って無理やり連れ出したと著書や集会で証言した男性がいました。朝日新聞は８０年代から９０年代初めに記事で男性を取り上げましたが、証言は虚偽という指摘があります。
特集：慰安婦問題を考える
男性は吉田清治氏。著書などでは日雇い労働者らを統制する組織である山口県労務報国会下関支部で動員部長をしていたと語っていた。
朝日新聞は吉田氏について確認できただけで１６回、記事にした。初掲載は８２年９月２日の大阪本社版朝刊社会面。大阪市内での講演内容として「済州島で２００人の若い朝鮮人女性を『狩り出した』」と報じた。執筆した大阪社会部の記者（６６）は「講演での話の内容は具体的かつ詳細で全く疑わなかった」と話す。
９０年代初め、他の新聞社も集会などで証言する吉田氏を記事で取り上げていた。
９２年４月３０日、産経新聞は朝刊で、秦郁彦氏による済州島での調査結果を元に証言に疑問を投げかける記事を掲載。週刊誌も「『創作』の疑い」と報じ始めた。
東京社会部の記者（５３）は産経新聞の記事の掲載直後、デスクの指示で吉田氏に会い、裏付けのための関係者の紹介やデータ提供を要請したが拒まれたという。
９７年３月３１日の特集記事のための取材の際、吉田氏は東京社会部記者（５７）との面会を拒否。虚偽ではないかという報道があることを電話で問うと「体験をそのまま書いた」と答えた。済州島でも取材し裏付けは得られなかったが、吉田氏の証言が虚偽だという確証がなかったため、「真偽は確認できない」と表記した。その後、朝日新聞は吉田氏を取り上げていない。
しかし、自民党の安倍晋三総裁が２０１２年１１月の日本記者クラブ主催の党首討論会で「朝日新聞の誤報による吉田清治という詐欺師のような男がつくった本がまるで事実かのように日本中に伝わって問題が大きくなった」と発言。一部の新聞や雑誌が朝日新聞批判を繰り返している。
今年４～５月、済州島内で７０代後半～９０代の計約４０人に話を聞いたが、強制連行したという吉田氏の記述を裏付ける証言は得られなかった。
干し魚の製造工場から数十人の女性を連れ去ったとされる北西部の町。魚を扱う工場は村で一つしかなく、経営に携わった地元男性（故人）の息子は「作っていたのは缶詰のみ。父から女性従業員が連れ去られたという話は聞いたことがない」と語った。「かやぶき」と記された工場の屋根は、韓国の当時の水産事業を研究する立命館大の河原典史教授（歴史地理学）が入手した当時の様子を記録した映像資料によると、トタンぶきとかわらぶきだった。
９３年６月に、吉田氏の著書をもとに済州島を調べたという韓国挺身隊研究所元研究員の姜貞淑（カンジョンスク）さんは「数カ所でそれぞれ数人の老人から話を聞いたが、記述にあるような証言は出なかった」と語った。
吉田氏は著書で、４３年５月に西部軍の動員命令で済州島に行き、その命令書の中身を記したものが妻（故人）の日記に残っていると書いていた。しかし、今回、吉田氏の長男（６４）に取材したところ、妻は日記をつけていなかったことがわかった。吉田氏は００年７月に死去したという。
吉田氏は９３年５月、吉見義明・中央大教授らと面会した際、「（強制連行した）日時や場所を変えた場合もある」と説明した上、動員命令書を写した日記の提示も拒んだといい、吉見氏は「証言としては使えないと確認するしかなかった」と指摘している＝注①。
戦時中の朝鮮半島の動員に詳しい外村大・東京大准教授は、吉田氏が所属していたという労務報国会は厚生省と内務省の指示で作られた組織だとし、「指揮系統からして軍が動員命令を出すことも、職員が直接朝鮮に出向くことも考えづらい」と話す。
吉田氏はまた、強制連行したとする４３年５月当時、済州島は「陸軍部隊本部」が「軍政を敷いていた」と説明していた。この点について、永井和・京都大教授（日本近現代史）は旧陸軍の資料から、済州島に陸軍の大部隊が集結するのは４５年４月以降だと指摘。「記述内容は事実とは考えられない」と話した。
読者のみなさまへ
吉田氏が済州島で慰安婦を強制連行したとする証言は虚偽だと判断し、記事を取り消します。当時、虚偽の証言を見抜けませんでした。済州島を再取材しましたが、証言を裏付ける話は得られませんでした。研究者への取材でも証言の核心部分についての矛盾がいくつも明らかになりました。
