file download

檔案下載

Red Cross Law of Japan Empire

(Also known as: Geneva Conventions Law of Japan empire fundamental laws)

7 August 2017

Definitions of Terms:
This Definitions of Terms is also the Common Definitions to RCJE Documents (You can download it from http://reGovJE.org/files/Definitions.pdf)

International Committee of the Red Cross, hereinafter “ICRC”;
The United Nations, hereinafter “UN”;
The Charter of the United Nations, hereinafter “UN Charter”;

The United States of America, hereinafter “US” or “USA” or “U.S.” or "the United States";
The Government of the United States of America, hereinafter “US Government”;

The State of the Japanese Empire, hereinafter “Japan Empire” or “JPE”;
The Government of the State of the Japan Empire, hereinafter “JPE Government”;
The Re-establishing Government of Japan Empire is the JPE Government.

Treaty of Peace with Japan signed at San Francisco on 8 September 1951, hereinafter “San Francisco Peace Treaty” or “SFPT”;
The “Formosa” stated in the SFPT, hereinafter “Taiwan”;
The “Pescadores” stated in the SFPT, hereinafter “Penghu”;

The State of Japan, which was forced to be independent from the Japan Empire on 3 May 1947 under U.S. military occupation, was recognized its independence and was entitled to use the name “Japan” as its State’s name in English by SFPT Article 1(b), hereinafter “Japan”;
The Government of the State of Japan, hereinafter “Japan Government”;

The Permanent Court of Arbitration, hereinafter “PCA”;
The International Court of Justice, hereinafter “ICJ”;
The International Criminal Court, hereinafter “ICC”;

Rescue Committee for the People of Japan Empire, which has formed on 22 May 2013 in the occupied Japan Empire’s territory Taiwan at Taipei, also known as Red Cross of Japan Empire, hereinafter “RCJE”;
The RCJE has registered in the Non-Governmental Organizations of the United Nations since 23 October 2013 under the Jurisdiction of ICC and of ICJ, hereinafter “UN NGO RCJE” or “RCJE”;

“The Republic of China in exile”, or “ROC in exile”, hereinafter “USAF-CRAG”; explained as follows:

1. The Republic of China (“ROC”) was the name of a National Independence Movement held by Chinese people in the southeast of Mainland China since 1912, which had ever supported by the Soviet Union, the Japan Empire and the United States. The ROC had ever allied with the Japan Empire to fight against the United States’ acts of aggression, had ever been murdered its leader and took over power by the US-supported Chinese warlord Chiang Kai-shek, and had finally failed its existence due to its corruption at the end of the Chinese civil war at its capital Nanking in October 1949;
2. Chinese warlord Chiang Kai-shek and his troops was a non-State armed group, and is an occupying agent of the United States, which was assigned to occupy Japan Empire’s territory Taiwan (Formosa) by the United States President through the US General MacArthur’s General Order No.1, and has its first ever landing Taiwan on 25 October 1945;
3. After the Chinese civil war at the end of 1949, Chiang Kai-shek who even was not an official of ROC but merely an US President assigned Chinese warlord, fled to the occupied Japan Empire’s territory Taiwan to rebuild the Republic of China in exile (this is proved by the US court, see figure 1 bellow);
4. After the Chinese civil war, Chiang Kai-shek and his troops fled to other occupied State’s territories, this makes the Chiang’s non-State Chinese armed group turn to be the Chinese Refugees armed group;
5. Through above (3) and (4), it proves that the Republic of China in exile is the Chinese Refugees armed group;
6. Through above (2) and (3), it proves that the Republic of China in exile is an US assigned aggression force.
7. Through above (5) and (6), it proves that the Republic of China in exile is the , hereinafter “USAF-CRAG”; for more details please refer to Annex 5 and 6 of the “Proclamation on the Forever Heaven Celebration Day of 2015 & National Banquet Invitation”; for more reference on Republic of China, please see Annex 3 and 4 of the said Proclamation.                    
   (You can download the said Proclamation from http://www.regovje.org/files/20160806ECfor20161223.pdf)
   

figure 1

The new constitution (Japan’s constitution), which the United States forced the Diet of Japan Empire to draft in 1946 and was needed to be examined by the United States, came into force on 3 May 1947 during the time that the Japan Empire was under military occupation of the US President-appointed General MacArthur, hereinafter "MacArthur Constitution".

A Japanese country was independent from Japan Empire on 3 May 1947 with its name in Kanji characters called “Nippon-koku” under US military occupation, of which MacArthur Constitution came into force in violation of International Law and Article 2-4 of the UN Charter to transfer a part* of sovereignty of Japan Empire from sovereign entities to people; this is obviously a serious War Crime, hereinafter “MacArthur Transfer”.

(*If it is a total transfer of sovereignty, it needs an official proclamation, an Imperial Edict shall be need in this case, for the transfer to express publicly and internationally, but no one can find the proclamation or the Imperial Edict under the U.S. military occupation. And it’s illegal to transfer any part of sovereignty under military occupation. )

As a result of the National Independence of the new Japanese country by the illegal MacArthur Transfer , in Article 1(b) of SFPT which came into force in 1952, the above newly independent country was recognized its independence and was entitled to use “Japan” as its English name by the Allied Powers. A peace treaty is enforced for peace only and has no territorial sovereignty to transfer. Therefore there is no territorial sovereignty transferred by the San Francisco “Peace” Treaty.

Subsequently, in Article 2 of SFPT, the new Japanese country “Japan” clearly founded its territorial boundary (where the new State might inherit from Japan Empire by MacArthur Transfer illegally) from renouncing its inheritances. And until the moment of SFPT coming into force, we could definitely confirm that the transfer of Japan Empire’s sovereignty on 3 May 1947 of the illegal MacArthur Transfer is a partial transfer. If the MacArthur Transfer is a total transfer of Japan Empire’s sovereignty, then the Article 2 of SFPT is in violation of International Law and in violation of territorial integrity of Article 2-4 of the UN Charter, and then the SFPT cannot be valid. This means that the SFPT is valid only if the MacArthur Transfer is a partial transfer and the new Japanese country “Japan” was independent from Japan Empire, so that the “Japan” can renounce its inheritance right of territories; and, the SFPT’s main purpose is to peacefully clarify the territorial boundary and interests between Japan Empire and Japan.

Regarding the term “empire”

In International Law, the term “empire” simply means that the ownership of the State is owned by the monarch, in other words, the sovereign entity of the State is the Emperor or the Queen. "Empire" and "Imperialism" are two different concepts that must not be confused. The name of the State of the Japanese Empire in Kanji characters is called “Dai Nippon Teikoku” - the Japan Empire, in which the term “empire” simply means that His Majesty the Emperor is one of sovereign entities of the State of the Japanese Empire, by no means imperialism. Any act of imperialism is the War Crime of aggression. Japan Empire is the signatory State to the Hague Conventions of 1899 and 1907, is the High Contracting Party to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their three Additional Protocols, and has never acted an aggression against any State. If the Japan Empire has ever constituted an act of aggression, the JPE Government is willing to face trial and to be punished under the Jurisdiction of International Court of Justice (ICJ), the International Criminal Court (ICC), or the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA).

Regarding the term “(Sec.) Prime Minister”

The plenipotentiary, the prime minister of the JPE Government is called His Excellency (Sec.) Prime Minister or His Excellency (Second) Prime Minister.

Regarding the Red Crystal Rising Sun Emblem

The Red Crystal Rising Sun Emblem is the Emblem of Geneva Conventions of 1949 in territories of the occupied Japan Empire including Taiwan and Penghu declared by the JPE Government on 20 DEC 2015.

The declaration is “Proclamation of the Red Crystal Rising Sun Emblem having been the Emblem of Geneva Conventions of 1949 in territories of the occupied Japan Empire including Taiwan and Penghu by the JPE Government”, and is stated in Annex 7 of “Proclamation on the Forever Heaven Celebration Day of 2015 & National Banquet Invitation”, and had sent to the United Nations, ICRC, Protecting Powers of Japan Empire, the Occupying Power USA and its USAF-CRAG.

The JPE Government has pledged, guaranteed, reaffirmed in all circumstances to subject to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their three Additional Protocols.

The Red Crystal Rising Sun Emblem is the Japanese Rising Sun incorporated into Distinctive emblem to be the Third Protocol Emblem of the Geneva Conventions of 1949. (figure 2)

1. Legal foundation

The JPE Government re-established on the World Day of Social Justice of 2014, and declared to accept, respect and understand the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their three Additional Protocols.

On 8 March 2014, the JPE Government has accessioned to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their three Additional Protocols submitted to Swiss Federal Council, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon and His Majesty the Emperor, and reaffirmed in all circumstances to comply with the said Conventions and Protocols.

1. Commentary of Article 155 of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention provides that “Accession is exactly the same in its effects as ratification, to which it is equivalent in all respects”;
2. Article 2 of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Conventionprovides that “Although one of the Powers in conflict may not be a party to the present Convention, the Powers who are parties thereto shall remain bound by it in their mutual relations. They shall furthermore be bound by the Convention in relation to the said Power, if the latter accepts and applies the provisions thereof.”