Meeting Agenda
Matters relating to the Constitution of Japan
1. SENGOKU Yoshito (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
reported on the Open Hearing held in Takamatsu on June 9, 2003.
2. Reports were heard from the chairpersons of the Subcommittee on Ideal
Government and Organizations and the Subcommittee on Guarantee of Fundamental
Human Rights; each report was followed by free discussion among the members.
3. A free discussion was held to review the debate conducted during the current session of the Diet, focusing on "security and the Constitution."
Report of the Subcommittee on Ideal Government and Organizations, and free
discussion
<< Public finances, with special reference to the relationship between
the audit system and the Diet (including the bicameral system) >>
Report by subcommittee chairperson (main points)
SUGIURA Seiken (Subcommittee Chairperson)
>> The importance of reviewing the systems for policy evaluation and public finances was recognized anew, given that, in an era of growing demand for policy-making that addresses complex social and economic conditions with timely and appropriate measures, the national government and local authorities currently face rigorous policy choices under stringent fiscal conditions. Under these circumstances, we took note of the heavy responsibility borne by Diet members, who are charged with making policy decisions, and we felt the need to study the ideal form of the Diet secretariats from the viewpoint of supporting policy evaluation.
>> The question of public finances has a direct bearing on the ideal
form of government, and we will continue to consider a vision for Japan
from many different angles.
Free discussion
INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)
>> In thinking about the evaluation and oversight of administration and public finances, in particular, we should take into account the facts that: (a) Article 90 stipulates the Board of Audit to be a body independent of both the Cabinet and the Diet; (b) the government also evaluates policies from the viewpoints of accountability and reflecting the results in future policy-making.
>> In the United States, where Congress has the right to introduce the budget, I think it is only natural that policy evaluation is carried out by the General Accounting Office (GAO), an arm of Congress.
>> Various mechanisms for Diet oversight of administrative affairs have been put in place, including the House of Representatives Committee on Audit and Oversight of Administration and a system which allows the Diet to request inspections and reports from the Board of Audit. However, these systems for overseeing and evaluating the conduct of administration, including those in which administrative agencies do their own evaluating, have been in existence for only a short time, and I think it is too early to pass judgment on them. I think the way the systems are operated will be important.
>> Because of the increasing importance of the evaluation of administrative
affairs, I think we could consider making an explicit provision in the
Constitution requiring the Cabinet to perform such evaluation and report
the results to the Diet.
SHIMA Satoshi (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> Article 59, paragraph 2 stipulates that a majority of two-thirds or more of the members present is required for the House of Representatives to pass a bill, when the House of Councillors makes a decision different from that of its own, and the House of Councillors can therefore be said effectively to have a veto over bills. This requirement for passage of rejected bills needs to be examined.
>> In view of the status assigned to the House of Councillors, I believe that under the Constitution it would be possible-though only just-to situate the Board of Audit in the House of Councillors.
>> There would be a problem in connection with Article 61 if the House of Councillors were given jurisdiction in matters of foreign relations, but I suggest that we might well consider giving the House of Councillors precedence with regard to the approval of treaties.
>> In a democracy, there is a tendency for public finances to become bloated. We should study the ideal form of public finances, taking into account the arguments in favor of stipulating the principle of fiscal balance in the Constitution.
HIRAI Takuya (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> Article 86 states that budgets shall be prepared for each fiscal year, but in order to achieve fiscal democracy and transparency, among other goals, we should consider introducing a system of budgets covering more than one fiscal year.
>> Since fiscal 2002, policy evaluation has been carried out under the Government Policy Evaluations Act, but we should create a mechanism to ensure that the evaluation results are reflected in the compilation of the budget.
>> Structural reform of the nation should begin with a thorough reform of public spending. Toward that end, I want to study a fiscal system designed for the future and unencumbered by the systems of the past.
SENGOKU Yoshito (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> I believe that the causes of Japan's present impasse can be understood to a considerable extent from a fiscal viewpoint. It should be noted, however, that fiscal figures are important as a basis for debating this subject, if we are to rise above party politics and gain a common understanding of the objective facts.
>> The Diet should be provided with the capacity to investigate and decide fiscal figures. Among other reasons, this is necessary because the problem of how resources should be distributed between the central and local governments and among the various ministries manifests itself in the budget and the final accounts. These investigations by the Diet should, of course, be reflected at the next stage of policy development.
>> In some ways, the constitutional status of the Board of Audit is unclear. The Board should be reorganized as a subordinate organization in the Diet, so that its investigative capacity can be fully utilized in the Diet's policy evaluation and inspection of final accounts.
SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito)
>> With regard to the present enormous fiscal deficit and related problems, I found Prof. SAKURAUCHI's comment that the Diet is responsible to future generations very thought-provoking. How to build a mechanism for fulfilling that responsibility into the Diet system is a difficult question, but I believe that the fact that the Diet has a responsibility to future generations should be stated clearly in the Constitution.
>> In my view, we should also give full consideration to the proposal that the House of Councillors be made a constitutionally independent body with no specific constituency in order to enable the Diet to represent the interests of future generations.
SUGIURA Seiken (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> The form of the Diet should undergo a radical review. Specifically, we should review the form of the Secretariats of both Houses. Also, debates in the plenary sessions of the Diet and in its committees have become formalized, and we should review their proper form in light of the importance of keeping watch over the conduct of national affairs from our standpoint as Diet members. In conducting the review, since the free discussions among members that we have been holding in this Commission are very meaningful, I think that the other committees and similar bodies should actively engage in free discussion of this kind.
Report of the Subcommittee on Guarantee of Fundamental Human Rights, and
free discussion
<< Fundamental human rights and the public welfare (from the viewpoint
of rebuilding the relationships between the state, the community, the family,
and the individual) >>
Report by subcommittee chairperson (main points)
OIDE Akira (Subcommittee Chairman)
>> The discussion noted that problems have arisen in present-day Japan because, in the opposition between "public" and "private," too much emphasis is placed on the private sphere. We also looked at the answers that communitarianism provides to these problems and the meaning of such concepts as "the public sphere" and "morality" in communitarianism.
>> In particular, views were expressed on the following points: (a) the argument that, in thinking about the content of "the public sphere" and "morality," we must not overlook the difference in religious attitudes that exists between Japan and the West; (b) the application of communitarian ideas to educational issues and to the ideal form of party politics; (c) making provision for "environmental rights" and "the right to create beautiful cities" in the Constitution.
>> In the past, the Constitution of Japan was interpreted mainly
in terms of liberalism, but an interdisciplinary approach known as public
philosophy, which transcends the public/private dichotomy seen in liberalism,
has begun to be adopted in such areas as the interpretation of "the
public welfare" and the status of "the family." Although
many aspects remain to be studied, I think that the introduction of this
new perspective made for a very meaningful discussion.
Free discussion
HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)
>> In the past, constitutional scholars understood "the public welfare" simply as a principle that restricted human rights, but "publicness" came to be actively construed in the sense in which we understand it today when a deeper level of debate was stimulated by pollution suits against public works projects, in which environmental rights and other "new human rights" were at issue. Thus, historically, the concept of "publicness" can be said to have developed in unison with the movement to gain new human rights.
>> As Prof. KOBAYASHI pointed out, what we need to do in order to rebuild the state, the community, the family and the individual is not to revise the existing Constitution, but to bring out and give concrete form to its latent meaning by pursuing political and social reforms consistent with a communitarian interpretation of the Constitution. The human rights provisions of the Constitution are deep enough to encompass the "new human rights." They can provide a blueprint for 21st-century Japan, and what is really needed is legislative work to bring out their latent power.
>> I think the key importance of "the public welfare" lies in preventing excessive restriction of human rights, in light of the restrictions that existed under the Meiji Constitution, when the state reserved the right to impose such restrictions by law, and the violations of human rights that have continued even under the existing Constitution. In the present political situation in Japan, the state abuses the concept of "the public welfare" by replacing "public" with "national," as we saw in the enactment of the emergency-response legislation. Thus, we should affirm the continuing importance of "the public welfare" in preventing excessive restriction of human rights. I believe that this will give our view of "the public sphere" a breadth of perspective that could not be obtained under the political conditions of the past.
SHIMA Satoshi (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> British Prime Minister Tony Blair took office advocating a "third way" and calling for the rebirth of community. Communitarian thinking was an influence on the "third way," and I have felt an affinity with communitarian ideas and paid attention to them since that time.
>> As the root meaning of the English term suggests, a constitution expresses the structure of a nation. Looking at the Japanese Constitution from a communitarian perspective, I believe that not only should its human rights provisions be revised to bring them up to date, as in the case of environmental rights, but that revisions are also needed to clearly express such aspects as the nation's history, its manifestation of a national spirit, and its traditions.
KITAGAWA Renko (Social Democratic Party)
>> I was particularly impressed and encouraged by Prof. KOBAYASHI's comment that there is no need to revise the Constitution of Japan because it includes many provisions consistent with communitarianism-even more so than the U.S. Constitution-and is a crowning achievement among the world's constitutions. However, I also agree with his warning that the tradition, community, virtues and related ideas on which communitarians place great importance are vague concepts, and that it could be dangerous to merely transpose communitarian ideas to Japan in their present form.
>> The "public sphere" for which communitarians aim is diverse and global in nature, not contained within the framework of the nation-state, and it is formed by people acting of their own free will. At the same time, however, I suggest that it is a sphere in which one has control over one's own duties and responsibilities, while avoiding the excessive exercise of rights. For example, it seems to me that if we focus on the individual, "the public sphere" is the sphere of the citizen who participates voluntarily in politics, but when we focus on the group, it becomes the sphere of a diverse array of entities such as NPOs and NGOs.
>> I think that the growing role of intermediate groups embodying "public" qualities, such as NPOs and NGOs, will make possible a diversification of lifestyles and lead to the establishment of a right of voluntary self-determination.
Free discussion to review the debate conducted in the current session of the Diet, focusing on "security and the Constitution" (in order of presentation)
Initial round of comments by representatives of each party
HIRAI Takuya (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> In the process by which the Meiji Constitution was enacted, I note that attention was paid not only to the universal values expressed by the term "the lawmaking of foreign nations" (modern Western constitutional thinking) but also to the "polity of the nation's founding" as seen in its tradition and culture, in other words, the national character. The communitarianism introduced by Prof. KOBAYASHI, who appeared before the Subcommittee on Guarantee of Fundamental Human Rights, could be called an imported version of the principle of community, and we should pursue this debate in such a way that it, too, is compatible with Japan's ancient traditions, such as "good morals and manners."
>> In view of the current international situation, it is the responsibility of politicians to put in place a structure to protect the lives and property of the people against the worst eventuality, and there are calls for giving the Self-Defense Forces proper legal status as an organization to protect the people's lives and property. Further, dispatching the Self-Defense Forces overseas is a response to expectations that Japan, as an economic power, will provide international cooperation. Given Japan's mature democracy, the establishment of civilian control, and the aspirations of all the Japanese people for peace, the public should have more confidence. I believe that, once they are backed by the confidence of the Japanese public, moves to put in place a defense structure and provide international cooperation will gain the understanding of neighboring countries also.
>> I believe that, while our approach should be founded on pacifist principles, we should establish peace realistically in order to guarantee our own security and ensure peace and security in the Northeast Asian region on the basis of a firm alliance with the United States, and to that end I believe we should revise Article 9.
SUTO Nobuhiko (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> With a proposal to send the Self-Defense Forces to Iraq under debate, I actually visited that country, and what I learned about the current situation there can be summarized in five points: (a) lifting the economic sanctions is the best form of aid, and huge preparation of private-sector supply and demand is under way; (b) Iraq was a functioning state as opposed to a failed state like Cambodia; (c) Iraq has not experienced civil war, nor a protracted total war, and it has sustained only small-scale war damage over a short period; (d) in light of these points, there is little need for emergency aid; rather, what is needed is to remedy the long-term impoverishment and the disparities of wealth caused by economic sanctions; (e) troops are needed only in the area of maintaining order.
>> I have a number of doubts about the justification for sending the Self-Defense Forces, based on the following points: (a) the doubtful existence of a constitutional basis, i.e., either the right of self-defense or a request by the United Nations; (b) the relationship with the exclusively defensive posture which is a fixed guideline of national policy; (c) the relationship with the principle of the centrality of the United Nations; (d) the lack of a UN resolution justifying the war; (e) the fact that Japan would be a party to the direct administration of occupied Iraq by the United States and its coalition partners; (f) the content of the UN resolutions on the removal of sanctions and reconstruction (which do not form a basis for dispatching peacekeeping forces); (g) the question of whether the recipient country has requested or consented to the dispatch of troops; (h) the lack of realistic rules of engagement in a situation where the use of weapons is likely to be necessary not only for self-defense but also for warning purposes. In view of these doubts, I believe there is no basis for dispatching troops.
>> The wishes of Iraqis to build a religiously and ethnically based federation are being denied by the provisional governing body, but I believe that reconstruction should be carried out by the Iraqis themselves, and that Japan is being asked to help realize government by the Iraqi people.
ENDO Kazuyoshi (New Komeito)
>> At the Open Hearings in Kanazawa and Takamatsu, in which I took part, every speaker recognized that there is a gap between the Constitution and reality, but opinion was divided over whether we should revise the Constitution or carry out reforms to bring the realities into line with the ideals of the Constitution. This was particularly striking with regard to security.
>> The Constitution anticipates the creation of a United Nations force, but the question of how to bridge the gap between this projected course and reality is the security issue that faces Japan today.
>> With regard to the question of visits to Yasukuni Shrine by the prime minister and members of the Cabinet, last December the Advisory Group to Consider a Memorial Facility for Remembering the Dead and Praying for Peace, a private panel of the chief cabinet secretary, released a report that states "a national, nonreligious and permanent facility where the nation as a whole can remember the dead and pray for peace is necessary." This is a realistic measure of the kind anticipated by the Constitution, and I believe it would convey the pacifist principles of the Constitution to the world. Moreover, a secular monument would have a different social significance from that of Yasukuni Shrine, and I believe that the two could coexist. I think the report's recommendation should be implemented without delay, thereby helping to bridge the gap between the Constitution and reality.
FUJISHIMA Masayuki (Liberal Party)
>> The attack on Iraq by the United States and Britain had no clear basis in international law and, strictly speaking, was not permissible. Moreover, the weapons of mass destruction which were cited as a justification for the attack have not been found. Nevertheless, the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty is not necessarily incompatible with the principle of the centrality of the United Nations, and one cannot say that the government's decision to support the United States was wrong when one considers the fact that Japan, unlike France and Germany, depends to a great extent on the United States for its security, and that we cannot contemplate dealing with the North Korean issue without the United States. However, the lack of accountability to the people that was shown by the government is certainly a problem in a democratic nation.
>> Security Council Resolution No. 1483 does not provide a basis for assistance in the reconstruction of Iraq. The basis for sending the Self-Defense Forces to Iraq should be made clear in relation to the Constitution, because it is an exercise of state power. Also, we should investigate Iraq's needs and cooperate as far as possible.
>> There should be clear criteria for international cooperation by the Self-Defense Forces. Accordingly, we should either establish explicit provisions in the Constitution, or, at a minimum, enact a permanent law that sets out a framework for such cooperation.
HARUNA Naoaki (Japanese Communist Party)
>> The legitimacy of the Iraq war under the UN Charter and international law is again being questioned. The weapons of mass destruction that were the rationale for the war have yet to be found, and the intelligence that was said to prove their existence is being challenged. The KOIZUMI administration should be strictly called to account for its support of the Iraq war.
>> The new Special Measures Bill for Iraq, which the government is considering presenting to the Diet, would provide logistical assistance for the occupying U.S. and British forces. However, the reconstruction of Iraq should be headed by the United Nations, and it would be against the wishes of the Iraqi people if the Self-Defense Forces were to assist the U.S. and British forces. Also, in light of the government's reply to an interpellation in 1980, it would be a violation of the Constitution to participate in a military occupation government.
>> The Iraq war was not recognized after the fact at the Evian Summit, either. French President Jacques Chirac criticized American unilateralism in a speech, as did the Chinese and Russian leaders in a joint statement. Moreover, most UN member nations oppose the Iraq war. The world has not accepted the United States' actions. By falling into line with the United States, Japan is going against the tide of global peace-building based on the UN Charter.
>> In a speech to the Diet when he visited Japan, South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun called for bilateral cooperation to create a stable structure on the Korean Peninsula and resolve the North Korean nuclear issue peacefully, for the sake of peace in Northeast Asia, and he urged Japan to provide leadership toward peace in the region. The nations of Asia are watching anxiously to see whether Japan will abide by its renunciation of war and maintain its exclusively defensive posture. Instead of following the U.S. line, Japan should preserve peace and international order and make every effort toward their further development in accordance with the Constitution, which advances the ideals of the UN Charter.
KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)
>> The attack on Iraq-an illegal action which ignored the United Nations-was clearly a mistake, in light of the subsequent failure to discover the weapons of mass destruction which were cited as its justification. How does Prime Minister KOIZUMI intend to account to the Japanese people for his support of the attack? Further, the number of civilian casualties in Iraq is thought to exceed those of the Gulf War. How does Prime Minister KOIZUMI intend to compensate the victims?
>> To assist in the reconstruction of Iraq, it seems that measures including sending the Self-Defense Forces to perform such duties as transporting weapons and ammunition are under consideration within the government. But sending the Self-Defense Forces would amount to cooperating with an army of occupation. Further, such operations are not permitted under the Constitution because transporting weapons and ammunition in a situation where public order is unstable can be said to constitute a use of force.
>> No state can be permitted to develop and possess nuclear weapons, which are inhumane. I believe that the risk of nuclear proliferation will continue unless all parties faithfully comply with the nuclear disarmament decisions that were agreed at the NPT Review Conference in 2000 and free themselves from the doctrine of nuclear deterrence. Further, with regard to the question of North Korea's possession of nuclear weapons, I believe that we can make a major contribution to stability in Northeast Asia by working toward a peaceful solution in accordance with the Constitution, and that a solution backed by force would go against the trend toward the elimination of nuclear weapons.
INOUE Kiichi (New Conservative Party)
>> We should close the gap between the Constitution and reality by discussing both security as a general question and how to deal with real-world problems.
>> If Japan faced a security crisis, under present circumstances we would be forced to resort to supralegal actions. In light of this situation, we should establish provisions in the Constitution that explicitly set out a framework for invoking the right of self-defense. The provisions that serve as a basis for participation in international peace operations should also be made explicit.
Comments after the first round
NAKAYAMA Taro, Chairman
>> In addressing security issues such as the right of self-defense, the interpretation of Article 9, and the gap between Article 9 and reality, this Commission should conduct a thorough debate and consolidate the issues in terms of their relationship with the Constitution, taking into account such factors as the provisions of the UN Charter and the San Francisco Peace Treaty which recognize the right of collective self-defense and regional arrangements, together with changes in the international community. In this way, the Commission should respond to complaints from the public that the constitutional debate on security is difficult to understand. I would like the directors' meeting to discuss this point.
OIDE Akira (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> A full investigation is needed in regard to the Iraq offensive, taking into account such factors as how it was related to the 9/11 terrorist attacks and the reliability of the intelligence concerning the existence of weapons of mass destruction.
KONNO Azuma (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> A previous speaker commented that it was our duty to the people to put the emergency-response legislation in place. However, in terms of fulfilling our duty to the people, I believe that we should have first enacted a Fundamental Law and, on that basis, put in place legislation for the protection of the people.
>> With regard to assistance for the reconstruction of Iraq, a proposal to send the Self-Defense Forces to carry out such duties as transporting weapons, ammunition, and troops, and disposing of weapons of mass destruction is being considered within the government. I see this as an irresponsible expansion of the role of the Self-Defense Forces, in view of the fact that even the Law on Special Measures Against Terrorism excluded the transport of weapons, ammunition, and troops on the grounds that it was indistinguishable from the use of force, plus the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found. Assistance for the reconstruction of Iraq must be "of the Iraqi people, by the Iraqi people, for the Iraqi people." To that end, the United Nations should head the reconstruction effort.
>> The British and U.S. governments are being called to account for the reliability of the intelligence on the existence of weapons of mass destruction which they used to justify the attack on Iraq. Since the Japanese government also supported their position, we should pursue its responsibility in the Diet. Failure to do so would undermine the spirit of the Preamble of the Constitution and its pacifist principles. Further, we should invite Prime Minister KOIZUMI to appear before this Commission in order to confirm how such matters as the legitimacy of the U.S.-British attack and participation in the reconstruction of Iraq are to be interpreted under the Constitution.
NAKAYAMA Masaaki (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> In thinking about a future vision for Japan, we should take into account the fact that the United States may sometimes change its policies in accordance with its global strategy, and the fact that it foresees a future rivalry with China. Under the existing Constitution, whereby we possess but cannot exercise the right of collective self-defense, even our membership in the United Nations could be said to be unconstitutional. We should recognize that we risk being left behind by the course of international affairs.
SHIMOJI Mikio (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> On a visit to Iraq from April 29 to May 5, I heard that Saddam Hussein's regime used chemical weapons in the Kurdish autonomous region, and some 100,000 Kurds lost their lives. We should also investigate this aspect of the Iraq question, that is, the facts about atrocities against civilians committed by Saddam Hussein's regime.
>> The condition of patients who suffered chemical attack is similar to that of atom-bomb victims, and in Iraq I was asked to send a Japanese medical team experienced in the treatment of atom-bomb victims. I believe we should respond positively to such requests.
TANIKAWA Kazuo (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> It seems to me that, where terrorism is concerned, in the future we will also have to take military sanctions into consideration.
>> I think that when France and Germany took the stance of not using force against Iraq, this was a decision of their governments, not an interpretation of their constitutions. In Japan, the interpretation of Article 11 in the Meiji Constitution and Article 9 in the present Constitution has become a major problem. This is a point that we should discuss thoroughly in regard to the security issue.
>> Earlier, Mr. NAKAYAMA made a comment concerning future topics to be discussed by this Commission. I would like to ask whether this matter has been decided at a directors' meeting, and also whether future discussions will be conducted by the same method that we are using at present?
> NAKAYAMA Taro, Chairman
>> I meant that I wanted to consider the matter at a future directors' meeting.
KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)
>> We have already discussed the Iraq question and related topics very fully. Is there any need to take up the security issue by itself for further discussion?
>> In connection with Mr. SHIMOJI's comment on assistance for the reconstruction of Iraq, I suggest that we should give serious thought to what Japan can do. The depleted uranium bullets used by U.S. forces in the Gulf War and the recent attack on Iraq have caused serious civilian casualties, and much is expected of Japan in this regard because of our experience in the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. After fully investigating the situation in Iraq, we should provide concrete humanitarian assistance that only Japan can provide, as in this case.
NAKAYAMA Masaaki (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> After World War II, the United States moved to strengthen China by means of Japan's economic power in order to prevent Sino-Soviet unity, but now that the Soviet Union has collapsed, I expect that, in future, the United States will weigh Japan and China against each other in a balance. In that case, we must consider the possibility that Japan will eventually be abandoned by the United States.
>> With regard to the North Korean issue, the government is only seeking the return of the Japanese nationals who were abducted, but it should also demand the return of the Yodo hijackers, who were involved in the abductions of Japanese nationals.
KUWABARA Yutaka (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> I think that the gap that has arisen between the Constitution and reality can be attributed to: (a) the fact that Japan was dependent on the United States during the Cold War, and after the Cold War it was co-opted into the U.S. strategy of meeting force with force; for example, the redefinition of the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty expanded the region covered by the security pact from the Far East to the whole of Asia; (b) the fact that we have always lacked a strategy for making the pacifist principles declared by the Constitution a reality, not just words on paper.
>> In his speech to the Diet during his recent visit to Japan, South Korean President Roh Moo Hyun spoke of the outlook for creating an organization for peace and cooperation in the Northeast Asian region, and also for creating a Northeast Asian Development Bank. I would think that, properly speaking, it is the Prime Minister of Japan who should be presenting such ideas. Only when we adopt this kind of perspective will the pacifism of the Constitution live up to its potential and connect with reality.
HANASHI Nobuyuki (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> In the Commission's debates during the current session of the Diet, I felt that there were several major underlying themes. These included: (a) the ideal relationship between peace and military force, and ways of realizing peace; (b) the meaning of "a nation"; (c) the importance of the family. I intend to work toward achieving a consensus among the parties and factions through discussion of these themes.
TANIKAWA Kazuo (Liberal Democratic Party)
>> In addition to the themes mentioned by Mr. HANASHI, I think we should discuss public finances, which are important to any discussion of the character of the nation. In particular, taking into account the fact that Japan continues to have a centralized system, we should discuss public finances at the local level.
SUEMATSU Yoshinori (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> I recently returned from observing the situation in Iraq. There are a number of problems regarding the proposed dispatch of the Self-Defense Forces to assist in reconstruction, including the following points: (a) the contingent could not be a member of the multinational coalition, whose main duties include suppressing rebellions, maintaining order, and setting up a national government; (b) nevertheless, there is a strong probability that, from the viewpoint of Iraqi civilians, it would be seen as an army and it would not be welcome; (c) public order in Iraq cannot be described as good; (d) if the Self-Defense Forces are sent, problems will arise under the Constitution, including the criteria for use of weapons.
>> Behind the government's position in favor of sending the Self-Defense Forces despite these problems, there appears to be a desire to emphasize the Japan-U.S. bilateral relationship under the influence of the U.S. strategy, and in that sense the dispatch of the Self-Defense Forces to Iraq might more accurately be called a political issue.
>> As Iraq is rebuilt, we can expect that a new government will be established and a new constitution enacted under the influence of the United States. These developments will be very interesting, including the question of whether a provision similar to Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan will be incorporated in the Iraqi constitution.
>> In some respects, I am grateful to the United States for laying the foundations of the existing Constitution, with its fine ideals. However, I believe that Japan should not worry solely about how it is regarded in the United States, but should free itself from these constraints and conduct its diplomacy and economic policy with an independent spirit.
KANEKO Tetsuo (Social Democratic Party)
>> Apart from security, another topic under discussion during the current session of the Diet was fundamental labor rights. This is shown by the fact that three bills relating to this area were submitted, and by the fact that the fundamental labor rights of civil servants became an issue in the debate over civil service reforms.
>> Amid the current recession, problems such as massive unemployment and the shift of young workers to temporary part-time jobs have been attracting considerable attention. Against this background, it seems to me that this Commission has not yet adequately discussed whether the fundamental labor rights set forth in Article 27, especially "the right to work," are being effectively guaranteed, despite the fact that this is an issue of core importance to Japan.
>> I think it is an important part of the Commission's role to discuss various labor issues in relation to the Constitution. These include problems relating to the proposed revisions of the Labor Standards Law, such as the stipulation of an explicit right of dismissal, which could be considered to change the basic nature of the law. They also include a number of points other than those already taken up in the debate over civil service reforms, together with the present state of compliance with the ILO recommendations and other international agreements.
MIZUSHIMA Hiroko (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> In thinking about security, I believe "human security" is important. We should make "human security" our basic approach as we pursue our discussions of Japan's future course, recognizing that, when security is viewed in terms of human happiness and health, it is not enough merely to protect the people's lives and property. Also, in order to think about "human security," I believe it will be necessary to remove the existing "barriers of the mind."
>> The Commission has set up a number of subcommittees, but it is important that the discussions not be self-contained within each subcommittee; instead, they should be developed further between the different subcommittees or in the plenary sessions. For example, at the June 5th session of the Subcommittee on Guarantee of Fundamental Human Rights, Prof. KOBAYASHI stated that, if the nation is viewed as a community, it is important that individuals participate voluntarily in that community, rather than the public dimension being imposed, and he warned that a system that imposes values leads to distorted results. These comments can also be applied to the field of security. We should direct our debate toward creating a framework for the nation in which the people can play an active part.
>> Naturally, I am aware of the importance of maintaining public order as an aspect of security. However, the harmful psychological effects of having weapons in close proximity are well known, as illustrated by the concern over the adverse effects of widespread gun ownership in American society. The Commission should direct its debate toward the realization of "human security" while bearing such issues in mind.
FURUKAWA Motohisa (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
>> The public's distrust of politics is due to politicians' inability to put together coherent policies, and also to the fact that policies are not implemented effectively. These problems are relevant to the ideal form of government, and although the issues involved can be dry and highly technical, it is very important, from the viewpoints of security and giving substance to human rights, that we discuss them. Popular sovereignty means self-government, and we should continue to conduct a careful investigation and discussion of the ideal form of government, in which the people can manage their own affairs according to their own wishes and by their own actions.