An open hearing was held in Hiroshima City, Hiroshima Prefecture, in conjunction with research on the Constitution of Japan. After statements were heard from persons who volunteered to attend the hearing to express their opinions (hereafter, "speakers"), questions were put to them.
1.Subject of the Hearing: The Constitution of Japan (especially emergency situations [including security] and the Constitution, the governing structure [including local government], and the guarantee of fundamental human rights).
2.Participating members of the Commission
- NAKAYAMA Taro (Liberal Democratic Party), Head of Mission and Chairman
- SENGOKU Yoshito (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents), Deputy Chairman
- FUNADA Hajime (Liberal Democratic Party), Director
- TOKAI Kisaburo (Liberal Democratic Party), member
- YAMAHANA Ikuo (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents), Director
- SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito), member
- YAMAGUCHI Tomio (Japanese Communist Party), member
- DOI Takako (Social Democratic Party), member
3.Speakers
- SATO Shuichi, civil servant
- HIDE Michihiro, physician and professor of Hiroshima University Graduate School
- TAKAHASHI Akihiro, former director, Hiroshima Peace Memorial Museum
- HIRATA Kanako, NGO employee
- OKADA Takahiro, president, Midori no Machi social welfare corporation
- ODA Haruto, member, Okayama Prefectural Assembly
Summary of the Chairman's opening comments
In his opening comments, Chairman NAKAYAMA explained the purpose of the hearing and presented a summary of the past discussions of the Research Commission on the Constitution.
Main points of statements by speakers
SATO Shuichi
>> With the unemployment rate currently at around 5 percent, there is a serious job shortage for both younger and older people, and this situation contravenes Articles 27 and 25. In a lawsuit over welfare benefits, the courts once ruled that "the Constitution is a goal for effort." At that time, the prevailing economic conditions may have left room for such a defense, but given the scale of the Japanese economy today, such excuses are no longer possible.
>> The government stints on spending that would benefit the people while pouring vast sums into supporting the dollar. Personal consumption and the economy as a whole would recover if distortions of this kind were corrected, for example, by extending the period during which unemployment benefits can be received under employment insurance, and by avoiding an increase in the share of medical costs charged to patients. The Prime Minister's slogan is "No growth without reform," but wouldn't it be more true to say that there can be "no growth without human rights"?
>> There is a growing momentum toward revising the Constitution, but it is the role of the Diet, first and foremost, to ensure that the government abides by the Constitution, and thus to ensure that it does not violate human rights.
>> If fundamental human rights are to be guaranteed, an absolute condition is the absence of war. Article 9 points the way for the world of the future, and this article absolutely must not be altered.
>> The way in which these open hearings are organized should be reconsidered to enable more of the people, with whom sovereignty resides, to present their views.
HIDE Michihiro
>> Hiroshima was the first city in the world to experience nuclear attack, and it is fitting that Hiroshima should send out a message about the security of the nation.
>> It is only through sheer good luck that Japan has been able to enjoy peace and the expansion of individual rights and freedoms under the banner of the Peace Constitution for the past 59 years, since World War II. There is no guarantee whatsoever that the same conditions will continue in the future.
>> Violations of national sovereignty such as wars, abductions, and territorial incursions ought not to occur, but we need to be prepared in case they do. Strictly speaking, our goal should be never to start a war, but not possessing an army has become an end in itself, and this is putting the cart before the horse. Likewise, the Constitution should be a means to the same end, not an end in itself. The Constitution is no longer in tune with the times, and therefore it should be changed.
>> It would be a mistake to think that every citizen of Hiroshima, every resident of Hiroshima Prefecture, and every atom bomb survivor is opposed to making the Self-Defense Forces a national army.
>> Together with the lives, property, and freedom of the people, an army protects the national identity. We should make a clear statement of the national identity in the Preamble to the Constitution.
>> In the aftermath of World War II, Japan, and especially Hiroshima, was charged with a mission for peace. That mission should be expressed in the form of positive action for peace, not, as it is today, by renouncing the right to belligerency and suspending our ability to think in order to avoid war.
>> In view of the above, Paragraph 2 of Article 9 should be deleted and the Self-Defense Forces should be developed into an army. In addition, the Preamble should be completely revised to set forth a vision of the nation and a policy of international cooperation, both of which should be based on Japan's history, traditions, and culture.
TAKAHASHI Akihiro
>> I was exposed to radiation from the atom bomb at the age of 14, in my second year of middle school, and I narrowly escaped death after an eighteen-month struggle for survival. Most of my classmates were ruthlessly murdered in what amounted to an experiment to test the power and destructive force of the atom bomb. To ensure that they did not die in vain, we who survived must act on their behalf and fulfill the responsibility of creating a world at peace. I will soon be 73, but I am still asking anew what it means to be alive.
>> I have managed to overcome the pain, the grief, and the hatred caused by the nuclear attack, to conquer the pent-up resentment and to recover while deeply appreciating the joy of peace, or freedom from war. That I was able to do this is entirely due to the Constitution of Japan, the finest constitution in the world, with its proclamation of pacifism and renunciation of war.
>> I am strongly opposed to revision of the Constitution, especially Article 9. Japan must firmly uphold Article 9 and courageously develop an omnidirectional foreign policy with peace diplomacy as its keynote.
>> Japan today faces a host of problems, including the state of the economy, education, and worsening public safety. Surely the most urgent task before us is not to review the Constitution or send the Self-Defense Forces to Iraq, but to strive to regain the Japan that was once the safest and most peaceful country in the world.
HIRATA Kanako
>> I became involved in the work of an NGO because I wanted to try and do something about environmental problems and international issues. While involved in this work, I began to think about Japan's attitude to the refugee question, to the issue of nuclear power and the environment, and to nuclear weapons, and I came to feel that there is much in Japan's stance that I cannot accept.
>> These experiences led me to study the Constitution. As I learned more about the Constitution, I felt, above all, that there is no need to change it. It seems to me that the real problem is that the people in charge of government and national affairs simply do not obey what the Constitution says; they do not put it into practice.
>> More than half a century ago, Japan invaded other nations in Asia and caused a great war. In that war, Japan took the lives of many people and destroyed the lives of many more, and I believe that the Constitution of Japan came into being out of remorse for those actions and a commitment never again to wage war. But, one by one, the government's current actions are making light of that commitment.
>> The Constitution of Japan is something of which we can be proud before the whole world, and there is no need whatsoever to change it. Before doing research on the Constitution, the government and the Diet should obey what the Constitution says. They should make a serious effort to put it into practice, and then do research on the outcome. The Constitution is the highest set of rules for Japan, and it was not created by abstract thinking. Its text embodies personal experience of that tragic war and the end point of a struggle toward freedom for humanity.
OKADA Takahiro
>> Local autonomy in Japan has long been described as "30 percent self-government." This is a clear sign that local autonomy, which plays a key role in the formation of a democratic state and which should be its foundation, remains inadequate and underdeveloped.
>> Three problems concerning local autonomy can be cited: (a) The trend toward extreme centralization in Tokyo is still continuing, despite its obvious ill effects; this should be regarded as a major problem, since a spirit of independence and self-responsibility are the basic principles of local autonomy. (b) There is a multitude of problems regarding the division of duties between the national and local governments, together with their finances, especially the form that the local allocation tax should take. We should go back to the starting point of local autonomy and reconstruct local public finances. (c) The multi-tiered structure of local government is in need of reform; the same is also true of the scale of local bodies, which have taken on a distorted structure as a result of treating the symptoms of the problem in a patchwork fashion instead of addressing its cause.
>> If the democracy which is now maturing is to be nurtured and made still more robust, the present constitutional status of local autonomy is inadequate. The constitutional provisions should be revised in order to express the basic ideals of local autonomy.
>> The ideals of local autonomy are along the following lines: Local autonomy starts with recognition of the importance of the community and the basic units of local government, and with residents mutually acknowledging the benefits they receive and the costs thereof, that is, with their awareness that municipal services and projects are paid for by their own taxes, instead of depending on the local allocation tax. I would like to see these points become the principles on which the basic units of local government are founded.
>> The introduction of a do-shu system should also be studied. As an ultimate goal, we should aim to amend the Constitution to create a federal system. In introducing a do-shu system, there are two points that must be established with regard to the relationship between the central and local governments: (a) the division of roles between these two levels should be clearly stipulated in the Constitution; (b) the right of fiscal autonomy should be guaranteed.
ODA Haruto
>> I belong to the baby-boom generation born in the late 1940s. It seems to me that, as a group, we care relatively little about patriotism or the history, traditions, and culture of Japan. We also seem to have little interest in the Constitution. Whatever position we may take, we should be prepared to participate more actively in the constitutional debate.
>> Education about the Constitution in the schools tends to have an ideological bias, and this kind of distorted teaching needs to be corrected. I hope that the Research Commission on the Constitution will conduct a detailed investigation into what is actually taught about the Constitution in the schools.
>> I believe the Constitution should be revised for two reasons: (a) there were problems in the process by which it was enacted; (b) over the course of nearly sixty years since it came into force, a need for additions and changes has arisen.
>> In particular, I would like to mention two points regarding the structure of government: (a) the possibility of either converting to a unicameral system or adopting different election systems for the Upper and Lower Houses should be considered, in view of the fact that we have a bicameral system in which the election systems for the two Houses are currently very similar; (b) popular review of the appointments of Supreme Court judges has become a mere formality, and the system should therefore be reviewed and possibly abolished.
>> The system of local government has increased dramatically in importance, and the details of the system should be specified in the Constitution. "The principle of local autonomy," which is explained as self-government by residents and local public entities, should also be set forth in the Constitution in a more concrete and easily understandable form. The Constitution should also stipulate the relationship between the national and local governments and the division of labor between them. When I hear the phrase "the ideal form of the guarantee of fundamental human rights," which is one of the subjects of this hearing, I feel nothing but a sense of futility. Does a guarantee of fundamental human rights even exist in this country? And who provides that guarantee? This is what I have been thinking about while waiting for 24 years for the return of my son.
Main questions and comments to speakers
NAKAYAMA Taro, Chairman
(To all speakers)
>> Education is the nation's cornerstone. When we think about a vision for the nation, the question of what is the best education for the children who will one day be responsible for Japan's future is an important one. At present, however, various problems have arisen in the educational sphere, including "classroom collapse," a trend toward criminal behavior at an increasingly early age, and a breakdown of social morality. New ideals of education are being explored, and as part of this the Fundamental Law on Education is under review. I would like to hear your views on the ideal form of education, taking into account these circumstances.
TOKAI Kisaburo (Liberal Democratic Party)
(To all speakers)
>> If you felt there was anything that you should have emphasized more or that you did not cover adequately in your statement, please add any further comments that you wish to make.
(To Mr. OKADA)
>> In the relationship between the national and local governments, what do you think is the national government's role?
YAMAHANA Ikuo (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)
(To Mr. OKADA and Mr. ODA)
>> I would like to hear your views on the promotion of local autonomy and the form of the Diet. For example, if a do-shu system were introduced, it would be possible to adopt a unicameral system, but do you agree that another alternative would be to maintain a bicameral system and establish different methods of electing the members of the two Houses?
(To Mr. SATO, Mr. TAKAHASHI, and Ms. HIRATA)
>> I would like to hear your views on how the Constitution should be guaranteed, from your standpoint as opponents of constitutional revision.
(To Dr. HIDE)
>> In your view, should we affirm the right of collective security and actively recognize overseas dispatch of the Self-Defense Forces?
SAITO Tetsuo (New Komeito)
(To Mr. SATO)
>> The existing Constitution makes provision for human rights in a broad and nonspecific way. Some people say that we should make detailed provision for each specific human right. What is your view of this position?
(To Dr. HIDE)
>> You stated that Japan should preserve its honor or national identity; could you explain what you meant by "honor" and "national identity"? What provision should we make for the right of collective self-defense? What is your view of the argument that the Self-Defense Forces can be recognized under the current interpretation of Article 9, without changing the article?
(To Mr. TAKAHASHI and Ms. HIRATA)
>> The doctrine of nuclear deterrence is a barrier in the way of efforts to abolish nuclear weapons. How do you think this should be overcome?
(To Mr. TAKAHASHI)
>> Do you think that Article 9 is a resource in the movement for the abolition of nuclear weapons?
(To Mr. OKADA and Mr. ODA)
>> I am concerned that if the costs of compulsory education are disbursed from general revenues instead of the national treasury, the right to receive a uniform education anywhere in the country may no longer be guaranteed. What are your views on this point?
YAMAGUCHI Tomio (Japanese Communist Party)
(To Mr. TAKAHASHI)
>> I would like to hear more about how the Constitution, with its declaration of pacifism, helped you overcome your experiences as a survivor of the atom bomb. Also, what do you think is the most important requirement in order to pass on Article 9 to the 21st century?
(To Ms. HIRATA)
>> You mentioned that large groups of people would make public appeals by arranging themselves to spell out a message, such as "Peace, Not War!" Is my understanding correct? What are the young people who take part hoping to achieve? I think this provides a good opportunity to see pacifism and democracy in a new light; do you agree? How do you view the fact that, although the people value the Constitution, their feelings are not reflected in the Diet?
(To Mr. SATO)
>> What is it in particular that impresses you in the Constitution's human rights provisions? How do you view the proposed pension reforms, which would raise contributions and lower the payment levels?
(To Mr. OKADA)
>> As you see it, is the present state of local self-government unconstitutional?
DOI Takako (Social Democratic Party)
(To Dr. HIDE and Mr. TAKAHASHI)
>> It has been suggested that Japan's identity lies in its traditions, its culture, and its pride. I believe that Article 9 is all of these things; would you like to comment? Also, I think it is important that the experience of Hiroshima should be part of the Japanese identity; do you agree?
(To Mr. SATO)
>> When one looks at the statements submitted by those who volunteered to attend the hearing and express their opinions, the great majority are opposed to constitutional revision, and one of the speakers commented that we should not think that we have heard the voice of the people today. What form do you think these open hearings should take?
Main points of comments from the floor
Following the responses to the questions posed by the members of the Commission, the chairman asked for opinions and comments from the floor. The following comments were received.
ISAKA Nobuyoshi
>> The time has come when we must revise the Constitution. We should make explicit provision for the possession of an army to defend the peace and the nation, and for the rights of individual and collective self-defense, and we should delete Paragraph 2 of Article 9. The existence of this article has detracted from the people's readiness to protect the nation and from the government's readiness to protect the people, as we have seen in the abduction issue. We should revise the Constitution, not least to protect the honor of the Self-Defense Forces currently in Iraq.
IMATANI Kenji
>> The society that we seek is one in which the people are respected as the holders of sovereignty and every member can live and work with human dignity. The pillars of such a society are labor and education. I would like to see you address youth unemployment and related problems, and in order to do this, I hope that you will give real meaning to the words of the Constitution which state that work is an obligation and a right. We should also put into practice an education in which everyone is respected according to their ability, but the conditions for this are not yet adequately in place, and it has not yet become a reality. As a result, there are still inadequacies in the guarantee of the right to maintain certain minimum standards of living. What matters most now is to protect the Constitution and put it into effect.
>> Regrettably, statements were made today that are at odds with reality, namely, that Japan is a monoethnic nation, and that the people are not exercising their own judgment in the popular review of the appointments of Supreme Court judges.
HAMA Kiyoko
>> The revision of Article 9 and related matters are currently under discussion, but as a nurse, I do not want to be placed in a life-threatening situation in the event of a military emergency.
>> Speaking as a woman, it is also to be deplored when one's loved ones are placed in a situation where their lives are in danger.