Seventh Meeting

Thursday, April 20, 2000

Meeting Agenda

1. Commission members observed a minute's silence in memory of Mr. Fukuoka Soya, a member who died on 11 April 2000.


2. Appointment of director

SASAKI Rikukai (Japanese Communist Party) was appointed as a director


3. Matters relating to the Constitution of Japan (formulating details of the Constitution)

After hearing statements from Professor IOKIBE Makoto and Professor AMAKAWA Akira concerning the above matters, questions were put to them.

Expert informants:

  • IOKIBE Makoto, Professor of Political Science (political history/political process in Japan), Graduate School of Law, Kobe University
  • AMAKAWA Akira, Professor of Political Science (postwar history in Japan), International Graduate School of Social Sciences, Yokohama National University

Members who put questions to Professor Iokibe

Members who put questions to Professor Amakawa


Main Points of Professor Iokibe's Statement

1. Background to Constitution establishment (focusing on Article 9)

>> Clear rejection in MacArthur Note of wars of aggression and wars of self-defense

>> Revision of second paragraph of MacArthur Note by Charles Louis Kades (approval of wars of self-defense)

>> Ashida amendment and request by Far Eastern Commission (FEC) for insertion of the provision stating that the Prime Minister and other Ministers of State must be civilians

>> Distinction made on Article 9 by MacArthur and Yoshida and other leaders between the "public teaching" (meaning absolute pacifism) on the one hand and the "esoteric knowledge" (covert preparedness to resort to armed actions in self-defense) on other hand

2. How the Constitution was produced and what it spelled out

>> Establishment of a Constitution which was not initiated by the Japanese government, validity of such a Constitution

>> Public support for the Constitution and the restoration of postwar Japan

3. Future perspectives

>> Changes in international climate brought out by the end of the Cold War and changes in public perceptions of the Constitution

>> Need to ensure national security on three levels: a self-reliance, in bilateral alliance, and in international framework

>> As the "heretical" argument for revision of the Constitution (current Constitution imposed on Japan, and should therefore be revised) is on the wane, it is important to replace it with an "orthodox" argument (current Constitution should be revised in line with national needs)
 

Members who put questions to Professor Iokibe, and main questions

HIRANUMA Takeo, Liberal Democratic Party

>> It is important to recognize that the Japanese Constitution was imposed on Japan by GHQ. Does it not appear to you that many of our current problems - moral deterioration, for example - stem from this?

>> Is there not a contradiction between the clause in the Preamble which states that "... we have determined to preserve our security and existence, trusting in the justice and faith of the peace-loving peoples of the world" and Article 9, which due to the Ashida amendment clearly recognizes wars of self-defense?


TARUTOKO Shinji, Democratic Party of Japan

>> To keep the Constitution in tune with the changing times, don't we need to take a fresh approach in amending the Constitution by giving up on ideology-dominated arguments and by freeing ourselves from the chain of events that led to the formation of the Constitution?

>> Rather than living with unclear interpretations of Article 9, wouldn't we be better off if we replaced the language in question with an expression of clear recognition of Japan's right to self-defense?  


FUKUSHIMA Yutaka, New Komeito and Reformers' Network

>> The distinction which you note (in terms of 'overt teaching' and 'secret knowledge') was drawn by MacArthur, Yoshida and others may have distorted the public's perceptions of national security.

>> I don't believe that postwar Germany experienced this "overt and secret" dichotomy that has been plaguing us. What differences were there in the ways of laying down the Constitution in Japan and the Grundgesetz  in Germany?

>> Isn't there a gaping generation gap among the people, with rising and younger generations having little awareness of national security?


SASAKI Rikukai, Japanese Communist Party

>> Can Article 9 be interpreted as having recognized the right to self-defense and international security from the time of establishment of the Constitution?

>> In relation to the Constitution, where does the ongoing process of Japan's rearmament stand, since it was initiated by the change in U.S. policy towards Japan?  


NAKAMURA Eiichi, New Conservative Party

>> What would have been really on the mind of Ashida when he approached Colonel Kades on the subject of amending Article 9? In so doing, shouldn't he have secured the assurance that Japan can legitimately possess armed forces for self-defense?  


FUTAMI Nobuaki, Liberal Party

>> Was there any difference of opinion between General MacArthur and Prime Minister Shidehara as to whether the war-renunciation clause included the right to self-defense?

>> I believe that there is room to doubt the Cabinet Legislation Bureau's view that the Constitution bars Japan from exercising collectively the right to defend itself. What do you think about this?  


TSUJIMOTO Kiyomi, Social Democratic Party

>> Setting Article 9 aside, what do you think of the rest of the Constitution?

>> A most strange situation has arisen. Certain people who have been dead opposed to the Environment Impact Assessment Act and the Information Disclosure Act somehow turn ardent advocates of including in the Constitution the [people's] rights to a [wholesome] environment and to information. What do you make of it?


Main points of Professor Amakawa's Statement

1. How the Local Autonomy Provisions (Chapter VIII) Were Worked Out

>> Constitutional Drafts prepared by Japanese (only Prof. Sasaki Soichi's draft had provisions on local autonomy)

>> The Chapter VIII provisions originated from Chapter 8 "Local Government" in the GHQ draft

(1) The Occupation policy was for disarmament of Japan and implementation of democracy in Japan [to ensure demilitarized Japan]

(2) One GHQ drafter, Milo Rowell, championed the insertion of local autonomy provisions in the Constitution

(3) The GHQ draft had provisions on electing chief executive officers of local public entities by direct popular vote, the [citizens'] right of autonomy [to set down charters], and local referendums on special acts with limited applicability to the specified region


>> Changes which occurred in the GHQ-Japanese government negotiations

(1) The Japanese attitude on the establishment of Chapter VIII: the "Local Self-Government" ("Local Autonomy") chapter was not opposed

(2) Retention of local autonomy instituted in the Meiji Era: namely the "honshi  (essence) of local autonomy"

(3) Institution of "local public entities" in addition to prefectures and municipalities

(4) Election of chief executive officers of local public entities by direct popular vote (the government's amending requests [for replacing "by direct popular vote" with "by vote"] were turned down)
 

2. Impact of the published draft Constitution

>> Immediate postwar situation in Japan following her defeat

(1) Reactions against the wartime machinery: "demilitarization" or return to peacetime normalcy

(2) Building a new Japan got under way: "government of, by, and for the people" was embraced

(3) It grew more and more apparent that the Occupation policy objectives and the Japanese leadership's willingness to comply were at variance; meanwhile the Japanese were strongly expected to initiate reforms on their own.

>> Institutional developments in local administration

(1) Wartime: the central government usurped [many of the already limited] powers of local administration and moved to supersede the 47-prefecture system with a much-fewer-but-wider regional system

(2) Postwar: revival of popular moves to expand autonomy extensively

>> Impact of the published draft Constitution:

(1) Leaning toward the direct popular election of prefectural governors;

(2) Chief executive officers of local public entities were elected by de-facto direct popular vote;

(3) Opposition mounted to the system of electing by direct popular vote a governor whose true status was an administrative bureaucrat of the central government;

(4) The election of prefectural governors by direct popular vote took root among the public, draining energy from the move to supersede the 47-prefecture system with a much-fewer-but-wider regional system
 

3. Conclusion

>> A micro [article-by-article] approach is needed (in examining the formulating process of individual articles)

>> The situation at the time must also be taken into consideration


Members who put questions to Professor Amakawa, and main questions

MORIYAMA Mayumi, Liberal Democratic Party

>> It is necessary to redefine the roles for the House of Representatives and for the House of Councillors and accordingly the method of choosing members to meet the characteristics of each House. A revision is in order on Article 43 in that its stipulation [dictating election as mandatory] is too restrictive even to devise an alternative method of choosing appropriate members. It is definitely necessary to revamp all the constitutional provisions on the National Diet, not just this particular article but all others, for the ideal Diet. What is your opinion?

>> Insistence on human rights often gets out of hand, and excessive insistence is unacceptable. For the sake of "the public good", some sort of practical guidelines must be worked out to curb excess in rights assertion. What do you think?  


KANO Michihiko, Democratic Party of Japan

>>Our party has been advocating a  ronken  position, a pro-argument stand, for exploring a Constitution which will match our vision of a Japanese society in the 21st century. What do you say?

>> For the future of Japan, our party envisages a federation of devolved states. What relations there should be between the administrative system based on larger administrative regions [than the existing prefectures] and the election of such regional governors by direct popular vote?

>> While it is obviously important to clarify the roles of the central government from those of local governments in local autonomy, wouldn't it make definitely clear all at once what the "honshi (essence) of local autonomy" means, if we were to define local public entities as "governments of devolution"?

>> To make the Constitution good in our daily life, wouldn't it be necessary to legislate an appropriate set of such statutes as the Local Autonomy Law as by-laws and/or annexes to the Constitution?


HIRATA Yoneo, New Komeito and Reformers' Network

>> What approach should we take in construing Article 9 in the laying down of the Constitution in the context of the MacArthur Note, the GHQ draft, the Ashida amendment, and the provision stating that the Prime Minister and other Ministers of State must be civilians?

>>In Article 5 (c) of the Treaty of Peace with Japan [popularly known as the San Francisco Peace Treaty], Japan was recognized as a sovereign nation possessing the inherent right of individual and collective self-defense. How can this be reconciled with the formulation of Article 9?

>> Our local government system is two-tiered, comprising a prefectural level and a municipal level. What kind of system, do you believe, was originally envisaged under the Constitution?  


HARUNA Naoaki, Japanese Communist Party

>> It has been the understanding of our party that the postwar system of electing chief executive officers of local public entities by direct popular vote was instituted in reflection of the fact that the prewar system of gubernatorial appointment by the Minster of Interior led to the building up of the militarism-war machine, driving [Imperial] Japan into a war of aggression.

>> A kind of local administration existed under the Imperial Constitution, but surely it was in no way local autonomy as we now know it?

>> It is utterly incomprehensible why the Japanese negotiators opposed the introduction of direct popular election despite their own proposal to GHQ of the "honshi (essence) of local autonomy", something that was not in the GHQ draft. What do you think was this "honshi (essence) of local autonomy"?

>> Don't you think that under the "honshi (essence) of local autonomy" local autonomies are rightfully entitled to impose their own taxes?

>> Do you think that the Chapter VIII provisions on local autonomy are in line with the trend of constitutions around the world?  


NAKAMURA Eiichi, New Conservative Party

>> Why is it that a hierarchical system has taken hold among the members of local assemblies?

>> What does you think of our policy: replacing the prefecture system with a system of 300 cities to cover the archipelago?

>> Although Chapter VIII relegates much authorization to statutes to be enacted in future, shouldn't there be clear provisions on such authorization in the Constitution itself?  


FUTAMI Nobuaki, Liberal Party

>> Repeated re-election of the same chief executive officers of local public entities is frowned upon as likely to end up in excessive concentration of power. Wasn't there any discussion in the course of deliberations on the Constitution to bar such practices?

>> Would you give us your reasoning on why there could be two different viewpoints on the institution of the police system: from the perspective of Article 9 and Chapter VIII?  


TSUJIMOTO Kiyomi, Social Democratic Party

>> What roles did Chapter VIII play during the immediate postwar period?

>> In deliberating statute bills which were associated with the new Japan-U.S. Defense Guidelines, heated discussions erupted on the point - whether or not it goes against Chapter VIII - of making local public entities available for rear support. What is your position? Isn't it important to push for devolution in bringing about demilitarization?

>> Although the Constitution abounds with ample foresight, reviews are in order on existing statues to check whether these foresights have been duly reflected in them. In this respect, the Local Autonomy Law seems deficient. What is your opinion?