Second Meeting

Thursday, November 1, 2002

Meeting Agenda

1. Matters relating to the Interim Report

After Chairman NAKAYAMA Taro explained the substance of the draft Interim Report, statements were made by members of the Commission. The Interim Report was then adopted.

Member who gave explanatory statement

Members who made statements


Main points of Chairman NAKAYAMA's explanatory statement

>> For the past two and a half years, the Research Commission on the Constitution has conducted research in accordance with the purpose of its establishment, instituting the themes "Details of the formulation and enactment of the Constitution of Japan," "Major postwar judgments of unconstitutionality," and "A vision for Japan in the 21st century," and also establishing subcommittees. As part of this process, the Commission has invited expert informants from a wide range of fields to present statements and answer questions, and the members have debated freely among themselves. In addition, we have held Open Hearings in various parts of the country to listen to the opinions of members of the public in all walks of life, and we have reflected the findings of several overseas survey missions in our research. We have now prepared an Interim Report, to be submitted to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, which summarizes the process and contents of the research up to this point.

>> The report is in four parts. The core part consists of two chapters of Part 3: Chapter 2, which describes the progress of the research, and Chapter 3, in which statements on points at issue by the members, informants, and other speakers are organized into categories corresponding to the articles of the Constitution. I would summarize the contents of the report as follows: (a) The Commission members have more or less reached a common understanding as to the objective historical facts regarding the formulation and enactment of the Constitution. (b) There are many issues that require further study with regard to the system of judicial review, its actual operation, and related matters. (c) As there have been major changes in both the domestic and the international situation, including changes in the concept of security and advances in science and technology, the Commission should proceed from the viewpoint of determining how these changes can best be reflected in the Constitution. (d) The findings of the overseas survey missions, in such areas as amendment procedures, constitutional courts, and public election of the prime minister, have been reflected in the Commission's research.

>> In future, while firmly maintaining the ideals of respecting human rights, sovereign power residing with the people, and permanently renouncing acts of invasion, we must continue to conduct broad and comprehensive research on a new vision for the nation of Japan from the standpoint of the Japanese people as a whole.

Main points of members' statements

YASUOKA Okiharu (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> I am in favor of issuing an Interim Report at this point, which is about halfway through the period scheduled for the Commission's research. Issuing an Interim Report will make the contents of the Commission's activities clear to the public and thus contribute to active constitutional debate at the national level, and it will also be an important step as the Commission proceeds with further investigations.

>> With regard to the overall contents of the Interim Report and the Commission's work, I feel that: (a) we should pursue further decentralization reforms and consider a new administrative structure for the nation, including in our field of view such possibilities as the introduction of a do-shu system; (b) we should think about duties and responsibilities within the nation, society, and the family as cooperative bodies; (c) we should take steps to establish security on a basis suited to this multipolar age; (d) we should review the bicameral system, taking into consideration the appropriate division of roles between the House of Representatives and the House of Councillors, among other factors.

>> To debate the Constitution is to think about the ideal form of the nation. The task presently facing Japan is to leave behind the "Western model," which consists of striving to catch up with and overtake the West, and to create a model of our own, in which we pursue new national goals while maintaining a foundation in Japanese history, tradition, and culture. Given this task, it is important that, based on the three principles of the Constitution, we set out clearly before the people the precepts that should guide Japan in the 21st century, together with an ideal vision for the nation, while taking into consideration the issues that face Japan as a member of the international community, such as the global environment and cooperation toward international peace, and that, in this way, we create a "people's constitution" with the participation of the whole nation.


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

>> In participating in the Research Commission, the Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents has proceeded from a 'pro-debate position' concerning the Constitution. The compilation of an Interim Report broadly encompassing the points at issue that have been raised during two and a half years of inquiry is the fruit of the debate carried on by the Commission. In future, we should conduct further open-minded constitutional debate with this report as a foundation.

>> In light of the fact that the Constitution lays down the framework of the nation, the following tasks should be addressed in future debates: a) discussion and study of the relationship between, on the one hand, the international legal framework and related institutions and, on the other, Japan and its Constitution; (b) consideration from the viewpoint of comparative constitutional studies; (c) submitting the work and findings of this Commission to a lively national debate.

>> As regards the future activities of the Commission, rather than beginning to interpret and discuss individual articles of the Constitution without adequate preparation, we should press on and compile the findings of the thematic debates centered in the subcommittees, which deal with important issues that will form the premises of this later discussion.


OTA Akihiro (New Komeito)

>> I believe that it is appropriate to issue the Interim Report, in that (a) it marks our having reached the halfway point of the research period, and (b) its contents summarize the progress of the research without laying down any one fixed direction. However, as one whose comments are included in the report, I feel that in places the summary is too brief and does not fully convey the speaker's meaning.

>> The Commission should resolve to proceed without haste on the basis of its stated purpose to "conduct broad and comprehensive research for five years," with the Interim Report serving as a reference for its future debates. At the same time, the Commission should also play the role of stimulating a national debate.

>> With regard to the direction of debate in the Commission: (a) It is necessary to establish a national identity or vision of the nation, to delve deeply into the true meaning of "nation" (in the sense of a people) from the viewpoint of regional community, and to arrive at our own perspective as Japanese on what it means to be human, against the background of the cultural differences between Japan and the West. (b) We should conduct future-oriented constitutional debate from the four perspectives of information technology, the genome, the environment, and participatory politics. (c) The basic policy of the New Komeito is firm adherence to Article 9 and maintenance of the three immutable principles of the sovereignty of the people, permanent pacifism, and the guarantee of fundamental human rights. However, we also respect the arguments that have been advanced in the Commission for clearly stipulating environmental rights, moral rights, and regional sovereignty, and we consider that the debate should be pursued in the direction of creating a constitution that is at once a constitution of the people, an environmental constitution, and a human rights constitution.


TAKEYAMA Yuriko (Liberal Party)

>> On behalf of the Liberal Party, I am in favor of adopting the Interim Report and submitting it to the Speaker of the House. There are four reasons for this position: (a) With the Interim Report as a basis for discussion, we will be able to carry out investigations even more substantial than those conducted to date. (b) Because the points at issue in the Commission's research have been organized objectively and fairly in categories corresponding to the articles of the Constitution, the report provides valuable materials for conducting constitutional debate in greater depth. (c) The Interim Report is meaningful in terms of heightening public interest by informing the people of the state of the Commission's work and forming a national consensus on the ideal form of the constitution, and it is also the historical duty of the Diet to leave a record of the research process for posterity. (d) As the Commission's research is supported by the cooperation of the public at every level of society, we naturally have a responsibility to those who have given us their cooperation to publish the results in the form of an Interim Report.

>> The Research Commission on the Constitution was established within the Diet, which has the right to initiate constitutional amendments, and the fact that the Commission has conducted broad, comprehensive, and specialized investigations on a wide array of issues is very meaningful.

>> The Liberal Party will strive toward a national consensus on the creation of a new constitution by explaining to the public the "Basic Policy for Creating a New Constitution" which we adopted in December 2000, in which we took into account the debate in the Research Commission, among other considerations. At the same time, we intend to ensure that our "Basic Policy" is reflected in the Commission's work, and to strive toward the enactment of a new constitution that is suited to be the foundation of Japan in the 21st century.


HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)

>> Since the purpose of this Commission is not to revise the Constitution but to conduct broad and comprehensive research thereon, we should investigate more thoroughly such matters as how the present Constitution is actually being implemented. I am opposed to compiling an Interim Report at this time merely because we have reached the halfway point, when such research has not yet been fully carried out.

>> Nor can I accept the contents of the draft Interim Report. In Part 3, Chapter 3, the statements of members and other speakers have been organized in categories corresponding to the articles of the Constitution. However, since the Commission, in its actual proceedings, has not conducted debate on themes corresponding to the articles, it is clear that this method of organization is oriented toward revising the Constitution. Further, among other problems, statements have been taken out of context and their true sense has been distorted.

>> At the Open Hearings held at five locations to date, the majority of speakers expressed the wish that the Commission would not conduct a debate premised on constitutional revision but, instead, protect the Constitution and keep it alive as a set of guiding principles for creating the nation of Japan, and they asked us to conduct research for this purpose. Further, during the overseas survey missions carried out this year, the people we visited in China and Republic of Korea expressed the trust that they place in Article 9. We should heed these voices of people in Japan and other countries of Asia, and return to the Commission's stated purpose, which is to conduct "broad and comprehensive research." We should conduct an in-depth inquiry into such areas as the state of constitutional politics and how the Constitution is actually being implemented.


KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)

>> We should first investigate whether the ideals and principles of the Constitution have been put into practice, together with related matters, but this has not yet been done. I am opposed to compiling an Interim Report with no regard for these circumstances merely because this is the halfway point.

>> Further, with regard to the editorial policy of the draft Interim Report, I cannot accept the fact that Part 3, Chapter 3, organizes the statements of members and other speakers in categories corresponding to the articles of the Constitution, despite the fact that the research to date has consisted mainly of statements by informants followed by question-and-answer sessions, with almost no opportunity for members to state their opinions concerning the individual articles. If the statements of members and other speakers are to be included, they should be edited chronologically; either Part 3, Chapter 3 should be re-edited along those lines, or it should be deleted entirely. Another problem is that the reports of the Open Hearings are too brief and do not convey the real substance of the hearings.


INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)

>> Two and a half years have passed since the Commission was established; during that time, a variety of opinions have been put forward, and I believe that the constitutional debate has reached greater depth. In future, together with bringing these opinions together in a condensed form, we should pursue a debate oriented toward seeking the understanding of the public. I am therefore in favor of the draft Interim Report, which I consider to be a fair summary of the process and contents of the research to date.

>> The New Conservative Party believes that it is necessary to revise the existing Constitution in order to create a constitution suitable for an international nation in the 21st century.