Thoughts on Confidentiality Obligations and Their Interpretation
Recently, discussions surrounding Watanabe Nagisa’s photo essay have intensified. Her reflections on “the day my heart was killed” and “my feelings afterward” have drawn criticism from some quarters, who claim it constitutes a violation of confidentiality obligations. To be honest, I find this rather questionable. First and foremost, confidentiality obligations imply, from a
legal standpoint, not disclosing specific information to outsiders. Given that the details of the settlement have not been made public, external parties cannot know what constitutes “prohibited disclosure.” Therefore, it seems unfair that some individuals hastily declare “it’s a violation!” without any evidence. Especially considering that settlements are meant to resolve legal matters, not emotional ones, the freedom of victims to share their experiences should be respected.
Regarding Nakai-san’s Statement
Similarly, there is a significant issue surrounding Nakai Masahiro’s statement on his official site, where he claimed, “I have never engaged in any form of violence, including raising my hand.” If Watanabe’s photo essay is considered a “violation of confidentiality,” then Nakai’s statement should also be scrutinized in the same way. Yet, I cannot understand why only Watanabe is facing criticism. Some argue that “it’s wrong because it was published as a book,” but this merely reflects a different platform for expression; the act of making a statement remains the same. Are interviews on television or in magazines acceptable, while posts on social media or blogs are not? There shouldn’t be a rule that alters what constitutes a “violation of confidentiality” based on the platform used.
Emotional Arguments and Their Impact
Moreover, discussions about confidentiality often veer into emotional territory. It is particularly unreasonable for victims to face renewed attacks; such reactions stem from ignorance and are unjustified. What’s even more puzzling is whether those who are criticizing Watanabe are genuinely in a position of societal strength. They seem to lack the imagination that anyone could find themselves in a victim’s shoes someday, as they defend the perpetrator and attack the victim. Through these discussions, I have reflected on the importance and limitations of confidentiality obligations. Watanabe’s courage and the internal struggles she faces are areas from which I believe we all can learn.
What Are Your Thoughts?
Ultimately, the interpretation and application of confidentiality obligations are incredibly complex issues. What do you think? I would love to hear your thoughts and experiences on this matter in the comments. Engaging with your opinions could lead to new insights for all of us.
