Ousted by Mitsubishi, too, questions surface about Carlos Ghosn's arrest
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/autos/ ... st-n940106
Ghosn suspected of shifting personal investment losses to Nissan: Asahi
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-niss ... SKCN1NW04X
Victim of plea bargaining? Carlos Ghosn’s arrest based on murky evidence, former prosecutor says
https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/ ... utor-says/
I do agree with what the NBC News piece says:He called the investigation that led to Ghosn’s arrest “violent” and “haphazardly done.”
Gohara said that prosecutors arrested Ghosn only on the assumption that he had violated the Financial Instruments and Exchange Law. He added that it was highly likely the sum missing from Ghosn’s securities report — leading to his arrest as well as the arrest of his aide Greg Kelly — was the equivalent of money Ghosn was entitled to receive after leaving the company.
“If Mr. Ghosn’s crime stems from the fact that he and other people failed to accurately describe the scheduled payment in a security report, there’s no such requirement,” he said.
Gohara also suggested that the underreported amount could have been from a stock deal known as stock appreciation rights, or SAR. But if that were the case, he said, Nissan’s other executives, including CEO Hiroto Saikawa, would also be held liable since they would also have participated in the arrangement.
In Ghosn’s arrest, prosecutors used Japan’s plea bargaining system that was introduced in June through legal amendments. It allows for the acceleration of court proceedings for crimes such as bribery, embezzlement, tax fraud and drug smuggling.
Under the system, defendants can plead guilty to lesser offenses in exchange for more lenient sentencing or the dismissal of other charges. It also allows criminal suspects to negotiate deals with prosecutors in exchange for information on other suspects, which Gohara says can encourage people to give false statements.
I semi-agree with what Sage at http://www.mynissanleaf.com/viewtopic.p ... 46#p541646 alluded to. If Ghosn had support from Saikawa, the Nissan board, top execs, etc. this all could have been swept under the rug or dealt with more quietly.But some observers are questioning why Nissan chose to turn the matter over to prosecutors rather than resolve the matter directly, as a number of competitors have done when senior executives were accused of financial misdeeds.
I remember reading an article describing Saikawa as strictly by the book, so perhaps he was pissed off that Ghosn wasn't? Supposedly Saikawa was a Nissan lifer, having joined straight out of college in 1977. So, he would've seen Nissan's rise and downfall (near death in 1999) but perhaps he was jealous or pissed off that a foreigner came in and saved the company, was worshipped as a hero, etc.? And, now Renault, the foreign company was in control of Nissan?