The controversy resulted in Yoshihide Sakaue, a member of the Parliament, holding a hearing on the matter in April, 2000. Sakaue said that as a result of the media coverage, and in response to a request from a constituent, he wanted to examine whether government officials had properly investigated complaints about Kitagawa. Officials of the National Police Agency acknowledged that they had investigated Kitagawa's agency, but had not determined that sexual harassment had occurred. Officials did indicate that Kitagawa's company was warned about permitting minors to use alcohol and smoke cigarettes. The National Police and Welfare Ministry indicated that under the Ministry's understanding of the law, even if the allegations against Kitagawa were true, the acts could not be considered child abuse because Kitagawa was neither parent nor guardian to the boys in his employ. In addition, officials testified that neither the boys nor their parents had pursued a criminal complaint against Kitagawa. Kitagawa denied any wrongdoing, and his attorney characterized the claims as being from disgruntled former employees voicing discontent. Kitagawa sued "Shukan Bunshun" for libel. Other than "Shukan Bunshun", none of the major Japanese media covered the story of the allegations against Kitagawa, the hearing in Parliament, or the Kitagawa lawsuit. "The New York Times" attributed this lack of coverage to Kitagawa's influence over the popular media. Once "Shukan Bunshun" began publication of the series, Johnny & Associates denied the magazine, and the other media owned by its parent organization, access to any of its performers.