Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (105723)	4/21/2014 5:20:48 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 217656

Neither more nor less politically driven then compensation from euro insurance companies and Swiss banks for their role in WWII. The case had been developing for a while, and in truth there are many such cases in Hong Kong over confiscated wealth during WWII by invader. Tip of the iceberg, and the progression was impeded by authorities wishing peace and prosperity for all, but alas, Japan chooses to relive the past by celebrating the past, forgetting one detail, that bills were unpaid and due. It is surely better to sort dues out the court than on the battlefield. Mitsubishi, a large slaver-worker company during WWII has much goodies on the mainland, along w/ Japanese banking system loans in china and on Hong Kong. And we must not forget the bombs left in china and occasionally going boom. Wonder how many cases shall be accepted in Nanking. Open season declared. Watch and brief.

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (105723)	4/21/2014 6:44:37 AM
From: TobagoJack	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 217656

Given that china is not a signatory to the San Francisco treaty that ended the war w/ Japan, and the folks suing are neither POWs nor soldiers but private citizens enslaved, once the floodgate opens, omg, and the floodgate has been opened wide. Soon enough any cargo bound for Japan shall be at risk, not only from china, but on any and all ship bound for Japan with cargo manifest pointing to the offending companies. Presumably rewards would be given to Africans properly notifying authorities of cargos loaded for Japan. Interestingly, there were many European and American private citizens captured in mainland china by the invading Japanese and sent to concentration camps in the Philippines, and given USA and euro courts refused to hear their case due to the usual CIA manipulation and sue-enough American double standard, China courts gives them am alternative venue. Soon enough the banks all around the world shall be put in a position to choose between right and wrong once account balances are identified and reckonings summed up. So, yes, while the cases are all about politics, but also about right vs wrong.

To: Haim R. Branisteanu who wrote (105723)	4/21/2014 8:41:28 AM
From: TobagoJack	Respond to of 217656

Speaking of flood gates ... ft.com Japan told to compensate South Korean workers for forced labour ©Fukagawa MunetoshiKorean forced laborers from the Mitsubishi Shipyard in Hiroshima A South Korean court ruled on Wednesday that a Japanese steelmaker should pay compensation to four South Korean workers for their forced labour during Japan’s colonisation of Korea, in the first such court decision against a Japanese company involving Korean workers. The Seoul High Court told Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metals Corp to pay Won100m ($88,000) for each Korean worker, reversing previous court rulings in South Korea. The ruling was made after South Korea’s Supreme Court returned the case in May last year, saying that the country’s 1965 treaty with Japan that settled postwar compensation claims cannot stop individuals from seeking compensation from Japan. The landmark ruling, which is likely to affect five similar pending cases, comes amid deteriorating relations between Korea and Japan during territorial disputes over a set of islands in the Sea of Japan (which South Korea calls the East Sea) and a row over comments by Japanese politicians about Korean “comfort women”, who were forced to provide sex to Japanese soldiers. “Japan’s key military supplier, Japan Iron & Steel, committed inhumane and illegal activities, mobilising [Korean] labourers for war invasions. Such acts are against the international rule and the constitution of Korea and Japan,” the court said in the ruling. “If Nippon Steel says it is not responsible for such acts, citing the Korea-Japan compensation agreement, it violates the core values that Korea’s constitution aims to protect,” it added. Japan Iron & Steel was later known as Nippon Steel until it merged with another steelmaker last year to form Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal. South Korea gave up the right to lodge new war compensation claims against Japan when the two countries normalised relations in 1965, a concession that Japan argues rules out all claims against the government, companies or individuals. Yoshihide Suga, Japan’s chief cabinet secretary, reiterated Tokyo’s view on Wednesday. “Our country’s position is that all claims for material compensation between Japan and South Korea are settled for good. If the court’s decision is in conflict with that, then it is not acceptable,” he said. Japan’s supreme court has rejected several damages suits against Japanese companies by former forced labourers, citing the 1965 treaty. Following the Wednesday ruling, Nippon Steel & Sumitomo Metal Group said it planned to appeal the ruling in Seoul’s Supreme Court, calling it an “unjust decision” that denies the 1965 treaty between the two countries. Other Japanese companies that allegedly exploited Korean labour during the war could face similar judgments. Five similar cases are pending in South Korea, including the ones against Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Nachi-Fujikoshi. Court rulings on Mitsubishi and Fujikoshi are expected on July 30 and December 5respectively. “We expect the ruling to have a significant influence over other pending cases as we prepare to file more cases with other victims,” said Kim Mi-kyung, a lawyer who represented the Korean plaintiffs against Nippon Steel. Japanese companies are doing more business in South Korea than ever, a situation that could make them more vulnerable to local court rulings regarding their past behaviour. Japanese companies were the largest source of foreign direct investment in South Korea last year, providing $4.5bn, five times more than they invested in 2007. Bilateral trade, meanwhile, has risen to more than $80bn annually. This article has been amended to reflect the fact that Japan and South Korea disagree over the name of the body of water separating the countries.