Meeting Agenda

1. Brainstorming discussions were held concerning the Constitution of Japan (A Vision for Japan in the 21st Century).

2. Chairman NAKAYAMA reported on the progress made by the Research Commission on the Constitution during the current session of the Diet. ( Click here )

Main points of comments by members of the Commission (in order of presentation)

HATOYAMA Kunio (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I regret to say that in recent months the Diet does not seem to have engaged in substantive debate from a global perspective or from the perspective of human history. If our field of view is to extend to the 22nd century and beyond, the new Constitution should have ideals and a philosophy that are grounded in history.

>> In light of the many environmental and other problems that humanity has caused by putting economic growth first, in future we should stop regarding human beings as "the lords of Creation," and we should incorporate the principle of coexistence with nature into the Constitution.
 

SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito)

>> In the constitutional debate, there is a strong school of thought that says we should discuss Article 9 first. However, while that is certainly an important subject for debate, we should also address questions that cannot be dealt with adequately under the existing Constitution, including (a) issues raised by scientific and technological progress, and (b) cultural issues.

>> Regarding (a), in this "century of bioscience," as the 21st century has been called, issues are arising that affect human dignity and the very essence of human existence, such as experiments with cloned embryos. We should discuss the relationship between such questions and academic freedom (Article 23), in the hope of reaching a national consensus, and should lay down some form of directional guidelines in the Constitution.

>> Regarding (b), Article 25's guarantee of "the minimum standards of wholesome and cultured living" tends to be understood in material terms only, but in the coming era Japan should emphasize "soft power" as it seeks to develop into a major nation in the sphere of culture and the arts. Directional guidelines toward this end should be laid down in the Constitution.
 

HOSOKAWA Ritsuo (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> The report issued by the Judicial Reform Council in June 2001 can be evaluated positively; for example, taking the present Constitution as its premise, it seeks to fully realize respect for the individual (Article 13) and popular sovereignty (the Preamble and Article 1). But there are also some problematic points, including failure to address core issues such as judicial negativism and the possibility of a jury system, and failure to address the relationship between the judiciary and the other two branches of powers.

>> With regard to the present state of judicial checks on the executive branch, we can say that: (a) few legal challenges of administrative measures go before the courts, largely due to the strictness of the requirements for bringing such cases; (b) even when such a suit is brought, the courts have a strong tendency to render decisions increasingly favorable to the administration as the case goes to successive levels of appeal. To overcome this situation, I suggest that we consider changing the method of appointing judges, in which the Cabinet presently plays a large part. Some possible alternatives would be to establish an advisory committee, or to have the Diet play a part in appointments.

HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)

>> During the current Diet session, many criticisms of the Anglo-American military offensive in Afghanistan and Japan's "participation in war" have been heard in this Commission and other forums. I believe that the existence of Article 9 is a background factor to these criticisms. Further, I believe that the role which Japan is being called on to play in the 21st century is to help resolve international conflicts by nonmilitary contributions. That is the spirit of the Constitution, and this Commission should investigate the stance of the government, which has taken measures contrary to that spirit.

>> With regard to popular election of the prime minister, I think we can say that almost none of the informants and other speakers have welcomed or supported such a system.

>> With regard to basic human rights, we should examine the state of Japan's guarantees of human rights by comparison with global standards.
 

KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)

>> In a nation under the rule of law, the Constitution is, of course, the supreme law of the land. But when one looks at the Diet's deliberations since the terrorist attacks on the United States, one is forced to say that the government has been ignoring the Constitution.

>> Prime Minister Koizumi has offered his own interpretation of the Preamble, and has said, for example, that there are gaps and ambiguities between the Preamble and Article 9. However, Japan arrived at its pacifist principles by reflecting on its reckless waging of war in Asia and the Pacific and its tragic experience of nuclear attack, and I do not think the Constitution is ambiguous in any way. Accordingly, this Commission should inquire into the intent of such statements by the Prime Minister.

>> Also, in the future, the Commission should conduct research on how the Constitution is actually put into practice in the political process and in society.
 

TSUZUKI Yuzuru (Liberal Party)

>> The present Constitution was created on the basis of how people thought two generations ago, and it is questionable whether we should be bound by the same way of thinking in the present era. Also, the gap between the Constitution and reality is problematic in terms of the public's attitude to the norms created by the Constitution. We should therefore present a new Constitution with a clear vision of the nation's present and future, in a form that the people can accept.

>> Changes seen in the past ten years include: (a) the achievement of an affluent society for the first time in the nation's history; (b) the rapid development of an information-oriented society and the emergence of diverse values; (c) the collapse of the Cold War structure and the intensification of ethnic and religious conflicts; (d) the declining birthrate and aging of the population. Japan is being called on to make a sound response to such changes, and we should think about the role of the Constitution in that context.
 

MATSUNAMI Kenshiro (New Conservative Party)

>> It is unclear whether the UN-sponsored talks to establish an interim government in Afghanistan can be evaluated positively in light of the right of ethnic groups to self-determination and the principle of noninterference in domestic affairs.

>> Afghanistan's tribal-centered politics embody a different way of thinking from the democracy on which our Constitution is founded. Clearly, a nation's constitution is closely bound up with its people's ethnicity and history.

>> Japan acquired its present Constitution when it was defeated in World War II, but we should create a new "peace constitution" suited to the international community of the 21st century, taking into account the subsequent historical changes and Japan's changing role in the world.
 

NAKAYAMA Masaaki (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> According to one commentator, the part of the Preamble that reads "we have determined to preserve our security and existence, trusting in the justice and faith of the peace-loving peoples of the world" is based on an illusion, in the light of studies of brain physiology which have shown that it is inherent in human nature to kill other human beings.

>> The Japanese word for peace, heiwa, has the root meaning of a state in which all are treated equally and all have enough to eat. But in view of the fact that such a state has not been achieved, there is a need to reexamine the Constitution, starting with the Preamble, while remaining free from illusions.
 

ITO Kosuke (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Given that, since the end of the "1955 structure," the ruling and opposition parties have developed a common basis for their understanding of the Constitution, and seeing also that this Commission's inquiries so far have had broadly general themes, I think that the time has come to discuss more concrete matters.

>> Some possible areas for debate on specific issues are: (a) the Preamble; (b) the status of the Emperor; (c) the proper form of international cooperation by the Self-Defense Forces; (d) environmental rights and the duty of the State to preserve the environment; (e) the appropriate powers and organization of the House of Councillors; (f) a system of popular election of the prime minister; (g) subsidies for private schools; (h) procedures for amendment of the Constitution.
 

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

> In light of the fact that, in the past, matters involving Japan's security have been determined to suit the United States, and also the fact that Japan's defense capability is seen as a threat by China, we should create a Constitution that is truly of the Japanese and by the Japanese, while clearly setting forth our ideals with respect to security.

>> Japan should provide a lead to the world by proposing a "world federation concept" as a realizable ideal for creating global peace.

>> While the Constitution has abundant provisions concerning freedoms and rights, there are almost none concerning duties, and no mention of patriotism. It is also problematic that the schools do not teach students about duties and the importance of patriotism before teaching them about freedoms and rights.
 

MORIOKA Masahiro (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Solving global problems requires many nations to work together, as such issues cannot be addressed according to the value system of any one nation alone. An idea that takes on importance in this context is "human security," which transcends the framework of the nation-state and emphasizes the value of individual human beings. We should provide leadership to the rest of the world by making explicit provision for this approach in the Constitution.

>> Excessive individualism and an overemphasis on rights are giving rise to problems in the home. In view of this, there should be a clear provision in the Constitution to the effect that the state should protect the home or family as the basic unit of social life.
 

NAKAMURA Tetsuji (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> I would suggest that, against the background of the current problems of excessive individualism and overemphasis of rights, there is a failure to fully realize the ideals of the Constitution, such as respect for human dignity and respect for others.

>> The right to interpret the Constitution belongs in the first instance to the Diet. On the basis of this awareness, the Diet should enact legislation that puts the ideals of the Constitution into practice.

>> From the viewpoint of strengthening judicial checks on the executive branch, I think it is worth studying the idea put forward here on November 29 by Professor HATAJIRI, namely, establishing a department within the Supreme Court which would specialize in handling constitutionality litigation, without going through revision of the Constitution.
 

SUGA Yoshihide (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Today we live in an environment very different from that of the era when the present Constitution was enacted, and we should therefore revise the Constitution in keeping with the changing times.

>> To allow the idea that the Constitution can be revised to take root in the public consciousness, rather than beginning with the highly controversial question of revising Article 9, we should first make revisions in such areas as private school subsidies and environmental rights, which are readily understandable to many members of the public.

>> We should also pursue further debate on a system of popular election of the prime minister.
 

UEDA Isamu (New Komeito)

>> While I believe that we should continue to value the spirit of the present Constitution, I also think that, since conditions have arisen which were not foreseen in the existing Constitution, some points should be reviewed or supplemented to meet the changing needs of the times.

>> The work of this Commission has already brought all the issues to light, and we should now proceed by presenting concrete ideas on these points and obtaining a consensus. Article 9, on which views are strongly divided, should be the last item for debate.
 

IMAMURA Masahiro (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I believe that the ideals of the existing Constitution have almost been fully realized. In future, we should check the degree to which those ideals have been attained and, where necessary, conduct a review with regard to the relationship between rights and duties, the family system, and so on.

>> We should revise the Constitution in accordance with the changing times and globalization.
 

AKAMINE Seiken (Japanese Communist Party)

>> The Research Commission on the Constitution should not be a forum for debating revision of the Constitution, but should devote itself solely to broad and comprehensive research.

>> The people of Okinawa look to Article 9 to preserve the spirit symbolized by the "Himeyuri" war memorial, but the present Cabinet's stance rides roughshod over the spirit of Article 9, as is clear from the passage of the Antiterrorism Special Measures Law and the revision of the International Peace Cooperation Law in the current session of the Diet.

>> I hope that the 21st century will be an era in which conflicts are resolved not by force of arms but by diplomacy and peaceful dialogue, and that the value of Article 9 will be sustained around the globe.
 

NAKASONE Yasuhiro (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> The present constitutional debate is taking place under different conditions from those of the late 1950s and early 1960s, when the Cabinet maintained a Commission on the Constitution. Those conditions are: (a) the end of the Cold War; (b) the elapse of some fifty years since Japan regained its independence; and (c) changes in public opinion regarding the Constitution.

>> The fact that many people in their thirties and forties are in favor of revising the Constitution shows that the younger generation has the Japanese "national capacity for assimilation," a capacity that has enabled this nation to create its own unique culture while actively incorporating the best of other cultures.

>> The interpretation of the Constitution regarding the right of collective self-defense can change with the times. The Cabinet Legislation Bureau's interpretation that Japan possesses but cannot exercise the right of collective self-defense should be reconsidered.

>> Areas for future debate include: (a) the Preamble; (b) Article 9; (c) emergency situations; (d) subsidies for private schools; (e) environmental issues; (f) the procedure for amending the Constitution; (g) a system of popular election of the prime minister; (h) the proper form of the House of Councillors; (i) the system of popular review of Supreme Court justices; (j) a constitutional court.

>> This Commission should aim to complete its broad-ranging constitutional debate in a period of about three years. In the fourth year, each party should propose an outline for a new Constitution, and we should enter the preparatory stage of revising the Constitution.
 

SUTO Nobuhiko (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> Taking into account the concept of "human security," we should change our thinking on security issues from the conventional state-centered approach to one that can respond to new challenges, such as terrorism, creation of refugees, and regional conflicts. Further, we should work on legislation related to crisis management.

>> We should study the ideal relationship between the state and civil society, including the questions of how Japan should address global issues such as refugees and poverty, and how to clarify the status of NGOs and NPOs in the Constitution.
 

KONNO Azuma (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> Even among scholars, opinion is divided as to the extent of human rights guaranteed to non-Japanese nationals, especially in regard to recognition of their social rights. Wide-ranging debate is needed in this area in future.

>> United Nations forces should play the central role in resolving international conflicts. Further, from the viewpoint of "human security," as a nation that has a "peace constitution," Japan should urge the United Nations to fulfill its intended function of seeking peaceful resolution of conflicts.
 

KOBAYASHI Kenji (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> Since the Constitution has been interpreted as not allowing the exercise of the right of collective self-defense, until now Japan's security has been maintained solely by means of the right of individual self-defense. In future, we should actively consider revising the Constitution in keeping with the changing international situation, based on such factors as Japan's role in the world, its role in Asia, and the national identity of the Japanese people.
 

HARA Yoko (Social Democratic Party)

>> Prime Minister Koizumi has made numerous statements--such as his advocacy of popular election of the prime minister--that are based on the assumption that the Constitution is to be revised. Nevertheless, this Commission should devote itself solely to broad and comprehensive research on the Constitution of Japan.

>> The Cross-Party Parliamentary Group for the Establishment of a Research Committee on the Constitution is taking steps to present a bill that would require a referendum on revision of the Constitution. The fact that the chairman of this Commission is also chairman of the League is problematic from the standpoint of neutrality and fairness. Also, I would like to point out that the low attendance rate of Commission members may cast doubt on the legitimacy of any report this Commission prepares.

>> We should place importance on the fact that there is a "silent majority" that has not expressed any dissatisfaction with the present Constitution.
 

SHIMOMURA Hakubun (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Even in the 21st century, the nation-state will likely continue to be the basic unit of international relations; we should therefore set forth a vision for the nation-state in the Constitution, which is our nation's fundamental law. In setting forth such a vision, important themes include the family, education, popular election of the prime minister, and security.

>> We should not continue the constitutional debate indefinitely. Instead, we should schedule a fixed cut-off point, the parties should each present their proposed revisions for discussion, and we should work toward forming a consensus.
 

OIDE Akira (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> A constitution for Japan in the 21st century should be founded on civil liberties, and in order to guarantee those liberties we should respect democracy. Speaking from that perspective, I would like to make the following points: (a) While maintaining the system of the Emperor as symbol, we should place the chapter on "The People" first in the Constitution. (b) As a prerequisite of civil liberties, the substance of the "right to live in peace" cited in the Preamble should be developed. (c) As the only nation to have experienced nuclear attack, we should incorporate the ideals of the abolition of nuclear weapons and the three non-nuclear principles in the Constitution. (d) We should actively include provisions for newly recognized human rights such as "environmental rights," and also for protection of animals. (e) We should promote decentralization in order to further democracy. (f) As a nation, we should act with an awareness of the need to protect the global environment and that of outer space.
 

SHIMA Satoshi (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> We should divide the constitutional debate into three areas: (a) substantive revision of the Constitution; (b) revision of laws; (c) changes in interpretation.

>> I would like the Commission to invite Prime Minister Koizumi, the head of the executive branch, as an informant when we discuss the mechanism of government. On that occasion, I would like to discuss such topics as prime ministerial leadership, the constitutional status of political parties, and the interpretation of the right of collective self-defense.
 

FUTADA Koji (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> The Constitution is not an eternal and timeless code. It is necessary to revise it in keeping with the changing times, and to enact corresponding legislation. Also, we should consider what provisions for amending the Constitution are most appropriate.
 

FUJISHIMA Masayuki (Liberal Party)

>> The public's trust in the Constitution is undermined when the government dispatches Self Defense Force personnel overseas while retaining an interpretation of the Constitution that does not permit it to exercise the right of collective self-defense, since the recent dispatch of forces can be regarded as an actual exercise of that right. Similarly, public trust is undermined by the fact that local self-government has been reduced to a shell, and by the Supreme Court's tendency to avoid verdicts of unconstitutionality.

>> Because society is changing rapidly, this Commission should not be too concerned about observing a five-year schedule, but should consider issuing its conclusions at an earlier date.
 

NAKAGAWA Masaharu (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> Japan should formulate a "national will" or "national strategy," which should be set forth clearly in the text of the Constitution.

>> With regard to this Commission's future proceedings: (a) each party should first distill its position on concrete and specific matters and present it in this forum; (b) the Commission should then conduct a thorough debate on its vision for the nation, together with related matters, and bring together its findings.