Cautious attitude imperative to constitutional revision proposals
(From The Japan Times May 5 issue)

Japan marked the 65th anniversary of the enforcement of the postwar Constitution on May 3, and 60 years have passed since the San Francisco Peace Treaty went into effect April 28, 1952, ending Japan’s occupation by the Allied Powers. Until that day, decrees issued by the Occupation forces headquarters had priority over the Constitution.

A conspicuous phenomenon this year is that several political parties — the Liberal Democratic Party, Your Party, Tachiagare Nippon (the Sunrise Party of Japan) and Osaka Ishin-no Kai (Osaka association for reform), a local party headed by Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto — have put forth proposals for revising the Constitution. It may be that they are trying to create sales points in the next Lower House election by taking advantage of the spread of the feeling of helplessness in society amid the long period of economic stagnation, and in the wake of the 3/11 earthquake and tsunami, and the subsequent Fukushima nuclear catastrophe.

Common sense tells us that it is important to take a cautious attitude to these constitutional revision proposals because they have cropped up in the absence of informed wide public discussions on issues dealt with by these proposals.

The basic idea behind enacting a constitution is to put a strict limit on the government’s power so that citizens’ rights and freedoms will be fully protected.

Another basic idea is to set up a governing system that will ensure the existence of different opinions, and facilitate solutions to problems through discussions and compromise. It is imperative for each citizen to scrutinize the constitutional revision proposals from these viewpoints.

Your Party and Osaka Ishin-no Kai call for introducing a one-chamber Diet system for the sake of making political decisions quickly. The LDP calls for giving emergency prerogatives to the government to stop the exercise of basic human rights and mobilize people through government decrees during an emergency like a major disaster.

These proposals completely ignore the basic constitutional principle of dispersing power to prevent the concentration of power in one section of the governing system.

It must be remembered that the two-chamber Diet system is designed to ensure compromise that reflects various opinions. A one-chamber system carries the danger of making a quick but unwise policy decision.

Political leaders, when facing a divided Diet, should view the challenge as a test of their ability to make constructive compromise through sincere negotiations and discussions. They should make utmost efforts so that such compromise will be made.

The important thing in dealing with an emergency is that the government prepare for such a situation all the time by accumulating related data and knowledge so that it can skillfully use available political and other means to solve the problems once an emergency happens.

The LDP and Tachiagare Nippon call for the establishment of full-fledged armed forces in place of the Self-Defense Forces. Our concern is that they may be deluded in thinking that possession of a full-fledged military will instantly solve the diplomatic problems that Japan faces. The possibility of abuse of military forces by the government should never be forgotten.

The LDP’s proposal stresses the importance of having pride in the Japanese nation and respecting harmony, stating that people must respect the national flag and anthem. It is deplorable that the LDP has forgotten the principle that these attitudes should be nurtured spontaneously.

The principal tenet of conservatism should be to respect the spontaneous, historical order that evolves in society. This is the meaning of tradition. It must be said that the LDP has greatly deviated from conservatism in a true sense of the word. And it goes without saying that the LDP’s proposal infringes on the freedom of thought and conscience.

The LDP and Tachiagare Nippon call for changing the status of the emperor from the “symbol of the State and the unity of the people, deriving from his position from the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power” as stipulated by the Constitution to the head of state.

The Meiji Constitution’s stipulation that the emperor is the head of the Japanese state should be regarded as an exceptional phenomenon in the history of Japan. It must be questioned whether the change of the emperor’s status as called for by the LDP and Tachiagare Nippon are true to the tradition of Japan.

日本語の抄訳はウィークリ5月12日号のP18に掲載されています。