Arab News, Dubai

Former Nissan Chairman Carlos Ghosn’s defense team inside and outside Japan have both issued statements on his case after skipping bail and illegally fleeing to Lebanon last week.

In a statement released by Ghosn’s defense team in France, they questioned Nissan’s motives towards the ex-CEO’s investigation.

They said that Nissan never once sought to interview Ghosn concerning the matters under investigation or to question the allegations.

To this date, Nissan has failed to share with Ghosn or the public the reports of the investigation or the evidence against him that it purported to find.

The statement by Ghosn’s lawyers questioned the credibility of Nissan’s claim that it conducted “a robust, thorough internal investigation”

“Rather, the facts demonstrate that investigation was never about finding the truth; it was initiated and carried out for the specific, predetermined purpose of taking down Carlos Ghosn to prevent him from further integrating Nissan and Renault, which threatened the independence of Nissan, one of Japan’s iconic, flagship companies,” the statement continued.

“No reputable company continues to employ  a senior trusted executive, an individual who pled guilty to a crime, much less permit that individual to conduct the investigation of the very conduct in which he was directly involved.”

The statement went on to question the independence of the investigation and added: “Although the supposedly ‘robust, thorough internal investigation’ purportedly found evidence of wrongdoing by Carlos Ghosn, it failed to discover evidence of Saikawa’s wrongdoing, which surfaced only after statements by Greg Kelly.”

The statement added that “Nissan never once sought to interview Carlos Ghosn concerning the matters under investigation, and even to this date has failed to share with Ghosn or the public the reports of the investigation or the evidence against him it purported to find.”

Contrastingly, the team inside Japan released a statement to local media saying that six Tokyo prosecutors issued a search and seizure warrant to Junichiro Hironaka, Ghosn’s lawyer’s office.

The prosecutors attempted to seize and search two personal computers, however, the law firm responded by exercising their right to “refuse the seizure of articles containing the confidential information of others which he/she has been entrusted with and retains or possesses in the course of his/her duties,” which falls under section 105 of Japan’s Code of Criminal Procedure.

The personal computer is subject to seizure refusal since it contains confidential information that Ghosn had entrusted his lawyer with.

Ghosn’s legal counsel has therefore opposed efforts to seize the computers since it contains confidential information that Ghosn had entrusted his lawyer with, and due to them being the only piece of evidence that can be used to prepare for his defence.

The statement supported it’s decision to protect Ghosn’s confidentiality using articles of the Lawyer Laws, “Article 23 of the Lawyer Law, Articles 23, 56 and 62 of the Basic Rules of Attorney Duties, Article 134 of the Penal Code). It is understood that refusal of seizure is not only a right for a lawyer but also an obligation since confidentiality is indispensable for a lawyer to carry out required duties."