The hostage crisis which occurred in Peru in December 1996 has brought forward several questions concerning the manner in which the media conducts its investigations and reports. Especially the Kyodo News Service (Kyoto) and Asahi TV (Asahi) whose reporters entered the Japanese Ambassador's residence and interviewed the guerrillas without permission of the Peruvian authority, incited a heated debate among many people. Various opinions have been presented about 1) whether this unauthorized interview with guerrillas could be justified under certain circumstances and 2) the problems that were inherent with the regulation of media by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) and the Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications (MPT).

On February 24, 1997, the JCLU submitted an official statement to the Minister of MPT and to the president of Asahi which reads: 1) Any information Asahi received through the interviews must be open to the public as is reasonably possible, 2) The government must not intervene in media activity in any matter.

There are those who argue that such interviews might hinder the ongoing negotiations between the Peruvian government and the guerrillas, and thus adversely effect the lives of the hostages. However, since it is generally recognized that negotiations could take longer than expected and that the hostages are treated fairly well, Kyodo and Asahi judged that the interview would not have such negative repercussions. In regard to the fact that a wireless set was left inside the residence, such conduct is not problematic as the instruments could be useful in maintaining communications with the guerrillas, not to mention the fact that other media groups had already been using such devices.

However, it is troubling that Kyodo and Asahi have not released any of the information as of yet, even though it is speculated that the content of the recordings is newsworthy.

Meanwhile, the MPT has requested that every broadcasting company refrain from reporting and the MOFA has rejected every interview from the media. This attitude on part of the government towards the media illustrates that interference on its parts can hinder and daunt media activity in the future. Consequently, it is clear that such government regulations cannot be permitted under any condition.