Subcommittee on Fundamental and Organizational Role of Politics (Second Meeting)

Thursday, March 14, 2002

Meeting Agenda

Matters concerning the fundamental and organizational role of politics

After a statement was heard from Prof. YAMAGUCHI Jiro concerning the above matters, questions were put to him; this was followed by discussion among the members.

Informant

  • YAMAGUCHI Jiro, Professor, Graduate School of Law, Hokkaido University

Members who put questions to Prof. YAMAGUCHI

Main points of Prof. YAMAGUCHI's statement

Introduction

>> I do not regard revision of the Constitution as taboo, but I believe that we should conduct the constitutional debate based on an overview of the political, administrative, and other institutional reforms of the 1990s.

1. The present state of Japan's parliamentary cabinet system, and a comparison with Britain

>> In Japan, there is much dissatisfaction with the present state of the parliamentary cabinet system. As I see it, however, the problems lie not in the system itself, but in the way it is operated, namely: (a) the unrestrained dominance of the governing parties and the frequent changes of leader with no input from the public; (b) the weakening of the Cabinet in relation to a bureaucracy grown excessively large within a compartmentalized administrative structure; and (c) the lack of transparency in the relationship between the Cabinet and the ruling parties.

>> Britain has a "descending" type of parliamentary cabinet system, characterized by: (a) selection of a political party, leader, and program-which form a trinity-by popular mandate in elections; (b) integration of the Cabinet and the ruling party through large-scale political appointments to administrative agencies; (c) the exercise of leadership over the bureaucracy from above.

>> By contrast, Japan's parliamentary cabinet system is of an "ascending" type, characterized by: (a) low awareness among the parties and the public of the significance of elections, i.e., the fact that they determine the choice of prime minister and policies; (b) no integration of the Cabinet and the ruling party or parties; (c) lack of effective leadership by the Cabinet, with decision-making of an incremental type originating from the bureaucracy.

>> To improve the existing parliamentary cabinet system, we need to consider new operational practices suited to the system, i.e., how constitutional conventions should be created, and, from the viewpoint of popular sovereignty, how to achieve an administration attuned to public opinion.

2. Prime ministerial leadership

>> Prime ministerial leadership means the leadership that should be displayed by the prime minister, as the highest political leader, toward the executive branch, the ruling party or parties, and the people.

>> Japan has passed through several political eras: the "golden age of Liberal Democratic Party government" (1960 to the mid-1970s), in which politicians and bureaucrats were united under a stable ruling party; the "age of a dual power structure" (1979-1993), which saw friendly rivalry and cooperation between politicians and bureaucrats in the context of factional politics; and the "age of coalition government" (1993 to the present), in which conflicts have arisen between politicians and the bureaucracy in the context of alliances among parties. At present, a system of popular election of the prime minister is being discussed amid growing popular demand for "direct" politics. However, I am opposed to this for the following reasons: (a) if we introduce a new system without reviewing the problems in the existing system, we will not obtain good results; (b) in the two foreseeable worst-case scenarios, either a complete split will occur between the executive and legislative branches, or all the parties in the Diet will become indistinguishable from the ruling party; and (c) political parties will lose their internal cohesion and the system of party politics will break down.

3. Issues for reform of the parliamentary cabinet system

>> Issues for reform of the parliamentary cabinet system include: (a) integration of the Cabinet and ruling party or parties; (b) policy implementation through more active participation of the ruling party in government; (c) establishing a relationship in which politicians direct the bureaucracy.

4. Proposals for reform

>> Issues of institutional reform include, in the Cabinet, (a) reforms to supersede the principle whereby each Minister of State has charge of a specific share of administrative affairs, e.g., revising Article 65 to vest executive power in the Prime Minister, and (b) integration of the policy-making process as a step toward establishing political authority over the executive branch; and in the Diet, (c) strengthening the Diet's function as a check on the executive branch (e.g., establishing the right of a minority to conduct investigations).

>> Issues for the reform of customary practices include: (a) in elections, establishing the practice of choosing a political party, leader, and program as a single package; (b) in the operation of the Cabinet, conjoining the ruling party's decision-making bodies with the Cabinet, and having Cabinet members hold office for the same term as the House of Representatives; (c) in the operation of the ruling party or parties, having Diet members who belong to these parties make policy through membership of the Cabinet; (d) making the ruling party's selection of its leader transparent and open.

Main points of questions and comments to Prof. YAMAGUCHI

NUKAGA Fukushiro (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> If we take measures such as banning exchanges of opinion between politicians and bureaucrats, or abolishing prior screening of bills by the ruling party, will this not in fact lead to greater control by the bureaucracy?

>> In Japan, election campaigns are based on general slogans, and the policy debate takes place during the annual determination of the budget. I think that introducing a British-style system in which the public chooses a political party, leader, and program all together at election time would require a major reform in the attitudes of both the public and the political parties. I would like to hear your views in this regard.

>> To ensure the healthy operation of parliamentary democracy, which do you think is more appropriate for Japan, a system with two major political parties or a multiparty system?


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

>> When one considers such factors as the central importance of standing committees in the Diet, which makes it difficult to achieve cohesiveness centered on the Prime Minister, I believe there are limits to the institutional reforms that can be made within the framework of the parliamentary cabinet system in Japan, and that we should introduce a system of popular election of the prime minister. What is your view of this?

>> I believe that we should stipulate the role of political parties in the Constitution. Do you agree with this view?

>> You pointed out the need to consider a system that allows a minority group to invoke the right to conduct investigations in relation to government in order to improve oversight of the executive branch. I, too, think that this is very important. Would you please explain further the issue of the right of a minority group to conduct investigations in relation to government?

>> I would like to hear your views on the relationship between the separation of powers and the fusion of the legislative and executive branches in the parliamentary cabinet system.


SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito)

>> As I see it, the British model of operation of a parliamentary cabinet system, which you advocate, is based on the concept that the Cabinet is the center of government. If this model of operation were introduced in Japan, how would you explain the relationship between the separation of powers and the Diet's status as the highest organ of state power?

>> I would like to hear your views on the division of roles between the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors.

>> I think that the hard-line stance of Israel's Prime Minister Sharon shows a negative aspect of the system of popular election of the prime minister, in that, once a policy has been presented at election time, it is subsequently difficult to change it. I would like to hear your views on this point.


FUJISHIMA Masayuki (Liberal Party)

>> I would like to hear your views on expanding political appointments.

>> I believe that Cabinet ministers should hold office for longer than at present, perhaps two to three years, in order to curb the conspicuous influence of the bureaucracy. I would like to hear your comments on this point.

>> If contact between bureaucrats and members of parliament were banned as in Britain, would this not hinder oversight of the executive branch by the Diet?

>> I would like to hear your views on the fact that, at present, the majority of bills are presented by the Cabinet and, moreover, many members' bills are actually prepared by bureaucrats.


YAMAGUCHI Tomio (Japanese Communist Party)

>> What distinctive provisions on the mechanism of government does the existing Constitution have that embody popular sovereignty?

>> You stated that, in comparison with Britain, Japan has an "ascending" type of parliamentary cabinet system. What do you see as the historical factors that led Japan to adopt this type of system?

>> You stated that Article 65 should be revised to read "Executive power shall be vested in the Prime Minister." But I would argue that there is no need to revise the Constitution, as the existing system already recognizes strong powers for the Prime Minister as head [of the Cabinet]. Would you like to comment on this?

>> I would like to hear your views as to any constitutional problems that would arise if popular election of the prime minister were adopted.


KITAGAWA Renko (Social Democratic Party)

>> How do you view the fact that the ruling parties are allocated more question time in the Diet?

>> In seeking the public's support for strengthening the powers of the opposition parties, which are in the minority, how should this be explained theoretically?

>> What do you think about political education in elementary and junior high schools? Also, what points should be borne in mind in providing such education?

>> Who are the politicians that you respect?


INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)

>> A country's political system is closely related to its cultural climate and traditions. Accordingly, in my view, it would not do simply to adopt the British system wholesale, without regard to the form of the parliamentary cabinet system, contact between politicians and bureaucrats, and so on. Do you agree with this view?

>> To help establish political authority, I think we should extend the terms of ministers, at least to the point where one minister serves for one full term of a Cabinet. Do you agree with this?

>> Do you agree that, if ministers are to exercise political leadership, it is not desirable to have excessively large ministries with jurisdiction over many different sectors?


ITO Kosuke (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> We should value the energy that is seen when a nation's people choose their own leader, as in the United States. I am not saying that just changing the system is enough, but I think that we should take steps to introduce popular election of the prime minister after assessing the overall situation, because, among other reasons, this would answer the needs of the people. Do you agree with this view?


BANNO Yutaka (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> In order to realize your proposals, I think three issues need to be addressed first: (a) identifying the proper role of the media; (b) providing support for opposition parties in order to create sound parties with the capacity to govern; (c) promoting further decentralization of government, including fiscal resources, in order to bring politics closer to the people and encourage public involvement. Would you like to comment on these points?


OKUNO Seisuke (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I think that introducing popular election of the prime minister would constitute a problem in relation to the Emperor system. Would you like to comment?

>> I think that bureaucrats should actively state their opinions and engage in debate with politicians, on the premise of a division of roles between the two. Do you agree with this?

>> You advocate making the Prime Minister's term of office the same as that of Diet members, but I do not think that we should lay down a fixed rule. Would you like to comment?

>> You seem to be critical of the Liberal Democratic Party's long tenure of power, but that tenure is the result of elections. Also, I believe that the postwar economic revival was made possible by the party's implementation of consistent policies during its long tenure. Would you like to comment?

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

MATSUZAWA Shigefumi (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> In my personal opinion, it is necessary to radically reform the mechanism of government, and for that reason I advocate introducing popular election of the prime minister. But if it is possible to operate a parliamentary cabinet system on the British model, in which the people can choose policies and candidates for prime minister at election time, and the prime minister elected in this way has a popular mandate and can exercise leadership, I do not reject that possibility.

>> In terms of the division of roles between the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors, should we not obtain balance by reforming the House of Councillors to give it specialized powers, such as approval of certain personnel appointments, especially high government officials, and overseeing budget implementation, and also by improving the election system so that minority opinions are reflected in the House of Councillors?


KITAGAWA Renko (Social Democratic Party)

>> I believe that, as Prof. Yamaguchi pointed out, institutional reform should not become an end in itself, and also that it would be meaningless to merely make reforms without reflecting on the public's apathy toward and sense of detachment from politics.

>> Politicians need to debate with one another in the forum of the Diet, devoting time to this, if they are to become figures worthy of respect.

>> To judge by media reports and other sources, is not Mr. Okuno a member of the "forces of resistance"?


OKUNO Seisuke (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I am a member of the Liberal Democratic Party, and I want the Koizumi Cabinet to achieve some form of results. It is true that I have expressed my opinions to a certain extent, but I have not adopted a stance that could be classed with the "forces of resistance."


YAMAGUCHI Tomio (Japanese Communist Party)

>> When we think about Japan in the twenty-first century, I believe it is important to think not in terms of revising the Constitution but in terms of how to realize the Constitution's provisions. From that standpoint, I agree with Prof. Yamaguchi that it is not appropriate to introduce popular election of the prime minister, which would lead to the negation of party politics.

>> The present era can be seen as a time when the quality of politics and political parties will be tested in the event that we design a system for the mechanism of government, and we should certainly maintain that perspective in the discussions of the Research Commission.


ITO Kosuke (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Just as Governor Ishihara of Tokyo has succeeded in forging many original policies after being elected with the support of a large number of Tokyo residents, I believe that it is the strength of Prime Minister Koizumi's popular support that has made it possible to resolutely carry out reforms that are accompanied by "pain," such as reform of the health care system.

>> The Liberal Democratic Party's policy-making is conducted through debate in the General Council, subcommittees, and related organs. We intend to reform these internal procedures also, e.g., by seeking review of the principle of unanimity, in order to enable the party president to exercise leadership.


SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito)

>> It seems to me that the common ground between Prof. Takahashi, the informant at our previous meeting, and Prof. Yamaguchi, our informant today, is their advocacy of "government by the Cabinet," in which the Diet is situated as part of the process of selecting the Cabinet, which governs. But I would argue that what is needed is a relationship of tension between the Diet and the Cabinet, based on a view of the separation of powers like that of Montesquieu.

>> The idea of both reflecting and condensing the will of the people at the same time through a system of single-seat constituencies provides much food for thought. However, I think that the Diet should reflect the diversity of public opinion, and that debate in the Diet should be the means by which to condense the will of the people and address various political issues. Thus, I cannot agree with a system of single-seat constituencies only, as advocated by Prof. Yamaguchi.


INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)

>> Among the important issues that should be addressed by the Cabinet, with its broad executive powers, is the question of crisis management. Japan's response in this field is lagging behind the rest of the world. Hence, it is only natural to debate a set of laws governing emergency situations, which can be regarded as part of crisis management.


OKUNO Seisuke (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Prof. Yamaguchi stated that we should reform the electoral system to enable the people to choose the prime minister. However, I think it would be better to work on the basis of the existing system and establish practices like those in Britain, in which the prime minister is effectively chosen at election time.


NAKAYAMA Taro (Liberal Democratic Party; Chairman of the Research Commission)

>> Popular review of appointments to the Supreme Court is carried on under Article 79, but under present conditions the information needed to make a judgment is not reaching the public adequately, and the system does not appear to be functioning effectively. In order to realize the ideal of a check exercised by the people with whom sovereign power resides, as was intended when this system was established, should we not consider reforming the system in the direction of approval by the Diet, whose members are the people's representatives?


KITAGAWA Renko (Social Democratic Party)

>> Mr. Inoue mentioned the set of laws governing emergency situations, but the scope of "crisis management" is open to question. With regard to natural disasters, measures are being put in place, particularly after the experience of the Great Hanshin Earthquake, but it is vital that debate be conducted within the framework of the Constitution with regard to other areas as well.


INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)

>> In view of the world situation, it is unrealistic to consider national policies on the premise that crises will not arise. It is important to consider, within the framework of the Constitution, practical response measures.


YAMAGUCHI Tomio (Japanese Communist Party)

>> Mr. Nakayama referred to the system of popular review of Supreme Court justices. It is important that we discuss this in light of the historical circumstances; for example, at one time, after the war, a committee was set up to decide Supreme Court appointments, but this method did not become established. Also, I believe that this is not necessarily a constitutional issue, but a question that can be resolved by legislation.

>> With regard to the set of laws governing emergency situations, because Japan has clearly stated the principle of pacifism in the Constitution, I am opposed to military measures.


INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)

>> Emotionally, I can understand not wanting to think in terms of a possible emergency situation, but actual policy is a different matter. I too do not think that making a provision in the Constitution is, by itself, enough to protect the nation.


NAKANO Kansei (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents; Deputy Chairman)

>> On the question of the relationship between politicians and bureaucrats, Prime Minister Koizumi has said in the Diet that ministries and bureaucrats needn't listen to what odd Diet members say, but these words should be understood as being addressed to people on the political side, which creates such Diet members, not to the ministries and bureaucrats. The political side should establish rules on the proper relationship between politicians and bureaucrats.