Third Meeting

Thursday, November 8, 2001

Meeting Agenda

Matters relating to the Constitution of Japan (A Vision for Japan in the 21st Century)

After statements were heard from Prof. HASEBE Yasuo and Prof. MORITA Akira concerning the above matters, questions were put to them.

Informants

  • HASEBE Yasuo, Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Tokyo
  • MORITA Akira, Professor, Graduate School of Law and Politics, University of Tokyo

Members who put questions to Prof. HASEBE

Members who put questions to Prof. MORITA

Main points of Prof. HASEBE's statement

1. Popular Election of the Prime Minister

>> I am not in favor of introducing a system of popular election of the prime minister.

>> In Israel, the introduction of popular election of the prime minister split the role of political parties, which had formerly presented their prime ministerial candidates and their policies to the people as a single package; the system was no longer able to function properly, and the stable conduct of government by the prime minister was obstructed.

>> Although Israel, unlike Japan, uses a system of proportional representation in elections to the Knesset, the results would probably be the same even if we were to combine a popular ballot for the prime minister with the small constituency system, as a popularly elected prime minister would still have to contend with an assembly composed of members who did not consider the interests of the country as a whole.

>> Some people advocate introducing a presidential system, but the United States is virtually the only country that has remained stable over the long term after adopting an American-style presidential system with strict separation of powers. Also, since America's political practices and climate are different from those of Japan, it would not work well to merely transplant the institutional framework.

2. The Relationship between the Houses of the Diet

>> To take full advantage of the virtues of a bicameral system, it is important that the two Houses be different in composition, among other features. Under the present Constitution, however, the House of Councillors has comparatively strong powers in a bicameral system, and in practice it inevitably takes on functions similar to those of the House of Representatives.

>> The best way to improve the situation would be to reduce the powers of the House of Councillors, but in reality this is difficult, since a constitutional amendment requires the consent of at least two-thirds of that House's members. Thus, we need to establish a customary practice, or what is known as a "convention of the Constitution," whereby the House of Councillors exercises its powers with restraint.

3. The Classical Image of Parliamentary Democracy and How It Has Changed

>> In the classical image of parliamentary democracy, the diverse opinions that exist in a society led to realization of the public good through the political process, i.e., deliberations in a parliamentary assembly open to the public.

>> With the rise of organized mass parties, however, deliberations open to the public became a mere formality and the classical image of parliamentary democracy no longer held good. This led to the emergence of advocates of "direct democracy", such as Carl Schmitt who claimed that this situation should be destroyed.

>> In their view, an assembly in which public deliberations had become a mere formality was meaningless, and all that took place there were direct dealings between interested parties.

4. Toward Deliberative Democracy

>> There have been calls for an approach known as "deliberative democracy," which is predicated on the objective existence of a public good and which holds that this can be attained through democratic debate and majority rule.

>> Jurgen Habermas argues that modern parliamentary democracy should be understood as having a broad extent, both in time and in space. In other words, parliamentary debate is also directed toward influencing public opinion in general; it stimulates debate in society, and the results are then reflected in elections.

>> In such a forum, it becomes possible to narrow the distance between general interests and special interests by conducting a rational argument founded on just principles.
 

Main points of questions put to Prof. HASEBE

NAKAYAMA Taro, Chairman

>> Since Prime Minister Koizumi raised the subject in his general policy address to the Diet in May of this year, the case for popular election of the prime minister has been attracting the interest of the public. However, a survey mission by a delegation from this House in September found many problems in the system of popular election of the prime minister of the kind seen in Israel. Further, if Japan were to introduce popular election of the prime minister, I think we would also have to consider the question of how it would affect the status of the Emperor and related matters. What are your views in this regard?
 

YASUOKA Okiharu (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> What background factors do you think are behind the increased support for popular election of the prime minister? Also, what measures can be taken to enable politicians to display strong leadership in their vigorous pursuit of their policy programs?

>> In my view, the fact that there are two channels for policy-making--the government and the ruling parties--has led to a loss of substance in parliamentary deliberations. Would you agree with this? Also, in order to prevent ill effects due to a vertical bureaucracy and lack of ideals in policy planning, I think it is important to unify the policy-making process by ensuring that those responsible for the ruling parties' policies are in the government. What are your views in this regard?

>> It seems wrong to me that the overall balance of power among the parties should be determined by the number of seats they hold in the House of Councillors. Reviewing the proper form of the House of Councillors may be the single most important item with regard to revision of the Constitution. What is your view in this regard?
 

YAMADA Toshimasa (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> How do you rate the Koizumi administration, which was created by a quasi-popular election of the prime minister?

>> It seems to me that your view that "It would be difficult to transplant an American-style presidential system to Japan because America's political culture and practices are not appropriate here" is not entirely consistent with the realities in this country. Would you like to comment on this?

>> Although a constitutional amendment is needed if the House of Councillors is to be reformed, the bar for passing an amendment is too high, and in effect nothing can be done. What is your view of this situation?
 

SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito)

>> I would like to hear your views on the ideal form of separation of the three powers (legislative, executive, and judicial) which holds a wide range of meanings, in the event that a system of popular election of the prime minister were introduced.

>> What do you think of the idea of introducing a system of popular election of the prime minister from the viewpoint of [1] reflecting and [2] condensing the will of the people?

>> What is the role or the ideal form of political parties in Japan?

>> I believe that the current system of elections for the House of Representatives (a small constituency system combined with a proportional representation system) has defects in terms of reflecting the will of the people. What is your view of this?
 

FUJISHIMA Masayuki (Liberal Party)

>> What kind of problems might arise if a presidential system were adopted in Japan?

>> If a system of popular election of the prime minister were introduced, what would be its relationship with the Emperor system?

>> In view of the national tendency of voters to be easily swayed by rumors, what problems do you envisage if a system of popular election of the prime minister were introduced in Japan?

>> I believe that party politics should be central to democratic government, but which form of party politics is preferable in Japan, two large parties or a multi-party system?

>> The House of Councillors has been called a carbon copy of the House of Representatives, but what role should it play? Also, what do you think of making the term of office shorter for members of the House of Councillors, which can never be dissolved, than for members of the House of Representatives?
 

HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)

>> From the viewpoint of the development of parliamentary democracy, is it appropriate to give a vast amount of power to one person?

>> I would like to hear what you, as an advocate of "deliberative democracy," think about the present state of deliberations in the Diet, which have become a mere formality, and also what you think of the role of the Diet and the ideal nature of Diet debate.

>> I believe that we should introduce an election system suited to the realities of Japanese society, namely, the facts that there are many axes of opposition and that the will of the people is diverse. I would like to hear your views on the recent debate about electoral reform in this regard.

>> What form do you think the parliamentary cabinet system required by the Constitution should take, and what do you think about the problems involved in the distorted relationship between politicians and bureaucrats?
 

HARA Yoko (Social Democratic Party)

>> While some people favor popular election of the prime minister, largely because it would enable the public to choose the prime minister directly, others say there would be an undeniable aspect of a popularity contest. I would like to hear your comments on the latter view.

>> Given that the bloated size of the bureaucracy is currently a problem, I believe that the functions of the Diet should be expanded and improved. What are your views in this regard?

>> Since Prime Minister Koizumi spoke in favor of introducing popular election of the prime minister, the question has been attracting public interest, but what is Prime Minister Koizumi's objective in seeking to introduce such a system?
 

MATSUNAMI Kenshiro (New Conservative Party)

>> I believe that the high intellectual level of the people in this country and the mature state of our democracy are factors behind the growing debate over introducing popular election of the prime minister. Would you agree with this view?

>> I believe that because a popularly elected prime minister would have a kind of charisma conferred by the will of the people, there is a problem that needs to be reconciled regarding the relationship of the premier's status with that of the Emperor, who has charisma conferred by tradition. What is your view in this regard?

>> The Israeli system of popular election of the prime minister is generally regarded as having failed, but some observers say that it could have achieved the desired results if elections for the Knesset had not been by proportional representation. What do you think of this view?
 

KONDO Motohiko (21st Century Club)

>> Other countries today have adopted various systems of government apart from the parliamentary cabinet system, including presidential and semi-presidential systems, but is there any system other than the parliamentary cabinet system that could function effectively in Japan?

>> In order to make the parliamentary cabinet system work better, should we not take measures designed to separate the executive and legislative functions, such as, for example, preventing Cabinet members from holding other offices concurrently, including office as Diet members?
 

Main points of Prof. MORITA's statement

1. The Relationship between Politicians and the Executive Branch

(Politicians and Bureaucrats) in the Science of Public Administration
>> The conventional explanation is that the system adopted by Japan involves a strict separation of powers, and that the legislative branch, or Diet, and the executive branch, which includes the Cabinet, are in an adversarial relationship, a relationship of checks and balances. From the standpoint of public administration, however, it is important to understand that the Diet and the Cabinet form a unified whole, the political sector, in that both have a basis in elections that express the will of the people, and to consider how best to strike a balance relationship between the political sector and the executive sector in the narrow sense, which consists of career administrators in the executive branch.

2. Points at Issue in the Japanese Cabinet System

(a) The Relationship between the Diet and the Cabinet
>> When the separation of powers is emphasized, the Diet and the Cabinet are regarded as being equal and mutually restraining, but they would be better viewed as a unified political sector, with both of them directing and overseeing the executive sector. Also, since the Diet, which is directly elected by the people, designates the prime minister, the Diet should be considered to have the superior position in the relationship between the two.

(b) The Relationship between the Prime Minister and Other Ministers of State
>> With a view to strengthening prime ministerial leadership, we should reexamine the appropriateness of Article 6 of the Cabinet Law, which says, "The Prime Minister shall direct and supervise all administrative departments based on policies determined by the Cabinet."

(c) The Relationship between the Cabinet and Administrative Departments
>> The ministers who make up the Cabinet have a dual nature: as "ministers of state" they are members of the political sector, while as "ministers in charge" they are integrated into the organization of a particular ministry and are in charge of only those matters under its jurisdiction. If the latter aspect predominates under the principle of division of responsibilities, the Cabinet runs the risk of becoming a place for mutual accommodation among the ministries, and also its unified function may be impaired.

3. The Formation and Continuation of Japan's Cabinet System

>> Our present cabinet system is a continuation of the system established under the Meiji Constitution; it is also part of a structure with an American-style separation of powers, i.e., an adversarial relationship between the Cabinet and the Diet. However, we tend to view this structure as being more absolute than it really is.

4. Changing the Cabinet System: Popular Election of the Prime Minister

>> In the background of the debate over popular election of the prime minister are the rise of international issues that require rapid decisions, and increasing exposure of the premier to the public eye through the media. I cannot support the idea, however, since there are a number of problems. For one thing, given the aim of establishing a mechanism of government led by the political sector, i.e., the Cabinet and the Diet together, it would be problematic to base the legitimacy of the premiership on authority other than that of the Diet. Another problem is that it would be difficult to make an elected prime minister resign if he or she acted contrary to the people's will.
 

Main points of questions put to Prof. MORITA

NAKAYAMA Taro, Chairman

>> If we introduced a system of popular election of the prime minister, how should we regard the relationship between the status of the prime minister and the status of the Emperor?

>> If we introduced a system of popular election of the prime minister, would not difficulties arise in the event that the Diet could not dismiss the prime minister by a vote of no-confidence?
 

SAKAI Takanori (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> In promoting decentralization of power, to what should we assign the role of linking the national and regional governments? Also, should we not consider introducing indirect elections for the heads of local authorities?

>> I believe that more Diet members should be appointed to the government's various advisory councils, in order to ensure that their discussions are led by the political sector. What is your view of this?

>> At the local government level, what do you think of actively utilizing independent administrative committees, like the local education boards?

>> At present, the government has multiple channels for providing information to the public. They include the administrative information services of the Ministry of Public Management, Home Affairs, Posts and Telecommunications; the Cabinet Secretariat's information services; and the governmental information services of the Cabinet Office. How should these multiple channels be streamlined?
 

TSUTSUI Nobutaka (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> Would there not be forces of resistance to the institutional reforms of the Cabinet and administration that you advocate? Also, were there not forces of resistance at the time of the recent reforms of the central ministries?

>> Article 6 of the Cabinet Law says, "The Prime Minister shall direct and supervise all administrative departments based on policies determined by the Cabinet." Under this provision, is it not true that the prime minister's powers are too weak, since he or she can act only through Cabinet decisions and through the medium of the ministers?

>> You described Cabinet ministers as having a dual nature, being both "members of the Cabinet" and thus part of the government sector, and also "ministers in charge" who are responsible for only those matters under particular ministry's jurisdiction. Should not more emphasis be placed on the former in order to strengthen the functions of the Cabinet?
 

OTA Akihiro (New Komeito)

>> Do you think that the recent reforms of the central ministries, which were intended to strengthen the functions of the Cabinet, have been effective?

>> You expressed doubt as to whether it is meaningful for members of the ruling parties to carry out interpellations of Cabinet members, on the grounds that debate in the Diet should be conducted between the ruling and opposition parties, not between the Diet and the Cabinet. As we have a coalition government, however, I think it is meaningful for members of the ruling parties to conduct interpellations of Cabinet members. What is your view in this regard?

>> I think we need to clarify how roles in making and executing policy should be divided among politicians, bureaucrats, and third-party entities such as advisory councils. What is your view in this regard?
 

TSUZUKI Yuzuru (Liberal Party)

>> I believe that the traditional deference to the "powers that be," that is, the tendency to depend on and obey public officials, is still deeply rooted among the public. Do you think that this national attitude can be changed by amending the Constitution? Also, since public officials tend to look out for the interests of their own ministries, I believe it is the politicians' role to exercise democratic control over public servants. What are your views in this regard?

>> Given that not only government policies but even the policies of the ruling parties are formulated by the bureaucracy, I believe that the opposition parties' policy proposals should have some kind of institutional guarantee, for example, the formation of shadow cabinets like the one set up by the New Frontier Party under the name "Tomorrow's Cabinet." What is your view of this?

>> I believe that we should abolish the advisory councils or similar entities in the executive branch and take steps instead to concentrate their deliberative function within the Diet, or have more policy legislative staff in the Diet to advise them on policy matters. What is your view of this?
 

SHIOKAWA Tetsuya (Japanese Communist Party)

>> As a means of realizing popular sovereignty, I believe that it is more important to achieve sound functioning of the parliamentary cabinet system than to "strengthen the functions of the Cabinet." I think that if the functions of the Cabinet are strengthened, there is a risk that the will of the people will no longer be reflected, or that the public will cease to have effective control over the administration. What is your view in this regard?

>> According to one view, rather than strong leadership by the prime minister, it is more important that Cabinet ministers decide policy by mutual consultation based on the will of the people. What is your view in this regard?

>> I believe that  failure to keep most campaign pledges made during an election, which is the people's opportunity to express their will, is a violation of democracy. What is your view of this?
 

KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)

>> The status of the prime ministership and its relationship with ministerial posts seem to have been established quite clearly in the Constitution, especially in Article 66, paragraph 1, and Article 68, but the spirit of these provisions has not been kept alive in the Cabinet Law and other legislation. Does not this legislation therefore demean the authority of the Constitution?

>> Even though the ministers who make up the Cabinet are in a position to oversee the bureaucracy with the confidence of the Diet, which represents the people, I believe that, in practice, they are actually restricted by the ministerial bureaucracies, and that this situation needs to be reformed. What is your view in this regard?

>> As a means of ongoing political participation by the public, I think that, in addition to elections, local referendums should be actively utilized. How do you view the significance of local referendums and their recent popularity?
 

MATSUNAMI Kenshiro (New Conservative Party)

>> In order to shift administrative control from the bureaucrats to politicians, would you not agree that it is important to increase the number of political appointments?

>> For the sake of national prosperity, do you think that talented people should take more jobs in public service or in private enterprise?

>> How does the relationship between the House of Peers and the House of Representatives under the Meiji Constitution differ from that between the House of Councillors and the House of Representatives under the present Constitution?
 

KONDO Motohiko (21st Century Club)

>> There has recently been a growing trend toward amalgamation of municipalities, but there are many difficulties involved. I would like to hear your ideas on how this can be done effectively.

>> I would like to hear your views on the introduction of a regional system that would supersede the 47 prefectures (ken) with a smaller number of large regions (do or shu), and also your views on the introduction of a federal system.

>> Local referendums cover a wide range of issues, from matters of immediate local concern to matters of national policy, and I think that the way their results should be interpreted also varies accordingly. I would like to hear your views regarding local referendums.