Fifth Meeting

Friday, April 15, 2005

Meeting Agenda

Matters relating to the Report

Chairman NAKAYAMA explained the substance of the draft Report, comments were made by the representatives of each party. The Report was then adopted.

Member who gave explanatory statement

Members who made comments

Main points of Chairman NAKAYAMA's explanatory statement

>> The Research Commission on the Constitution was established by the House of Representatives on January 20, 2000 for the purpose of conducting broad and comprehensive research on the Constitution of Japan. Since then, the Commission has vigorously conducted this research.

>> After preliminary research on the details of the formulation and enactment of the Constitution of Japan and a vision for Japan in the 21st century and other themes, the Commission set up subcommittees and proceeded to research every aspect of the Constitution, and finally conducted research covering the Constitution as a whole. During the course of this research, we have held open hearings and regional open hearings, and conducted research overseas by the Study Missions on the constitutions of other countries. On November 1, 2002, the Commission produced its Interim Report and submitted it to the Speaker of the House of Representatives. At this meeting, the Commission will put together its draft Report and submit it to the Speaker.

>> This draft Report will consist of Part 1: Background to the Establishment of the Research Commission on the Constitution; Part 2: Purpose, Organization, and Operation of the Research Commission on the Constitution; Part 3: Progress and Contents of Research Conducted by the Research Commission on the Constitution; and Part 4: Reference Material. The core of the Report is Chapters 2 and 3 of Part 3, which summarize the contents of the research.

>> In Part 3, Chapter 3, the comments of members and informants are classified and summarized according to the themes discussed and it is indicated which opinions were most frequently expressed. The aim of this is not to indicate majority opinions as determined by a decision-marking process in the Commission but to show the overall spread of members' views concerning each theme.

>> The most typical issues brought up in the discussions outlined in this draft Report are: (a) the altered situation resulting from progress in science and technology and changes in the national security environment, etc. and (b) the problems arising from the gaps between the Constitution and present-day reality.

>> In the research conducted overseas, the Commission heard explanations by representatives of the countries surveyed about the numerous revisions that had been made to their constitutions. In the open hearings and regional open hearings in Japan, based on the view that a constitution belongs to the people, the Commission heard the opinions of speakers, including members of the general public who had been invited to express their views, about their visions for Japan and the Constitution.

>> The Commission takes pride in the fact that it has conducted broad and comprehensive research on the Constitution based on the views of Japanese citizens as a whole concerning their vision for a new Japan, while upholding the ideals of respect for human rights, popular sovereignty, and the determination to never again be an aggressor nation.

>> This draft Report is a compilation of the research the Commission has conducted. In submitting it, the Commission believes that it paves the way for a new stage in the discussion of the Constitution in Japan.


Main points of comments by members of the Commission

FUNADA Hajime (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> The third president of the United States, Thomas Jefferson, wrote: "Nothing is more likely than that the enumeration of powers is defective. This is the ordinary case of all human works. Let us then go on perfecting it by adding by way of amendment to the Constitution those powers which time and trial show are still wanting." The Constitution of Japan is no exception.

>> The Research Commission on the Constitution was established when, as a result of changes in the international situation and social environment, the gap between the Constitution and reality became conspicuous. The establishment of the Commission has reduced the resistance of the Japanese people to discussing the Constitution.

>> The Report is a faithful record of the discussions of this Commission. By indicating the numerical weighting of opinions concerning each theme according to established criteria, it is possible to get a clear overview of the views of the members, which will serve as useful reference material in future citizens' discussions of the Constitution.

>> The fact that there were many comments positively viewing the fact that the Constitution of Japan has taken root among the Japanese people over the long period after the war, although GHQ was involved in the process of its formulation and enactment, shows that this is the common perception of post-war generations in Japan. The frequency of opinions supporting the maintenance of the Emperor-as-symbol system, guarantee of fundamental human rights, and continuation of the bicameral Diet and parliamentary cabinet system, reflects the extent to which the basic articles of the Constitution have taken root.

>> The question of the imperial succession should be determined by the Imperial Household Law, but this Commission took the direction of approving the possibility of a female emperor at an early stage in this debate. Regarding the exercise of the right of self-defense and existence of the Self-Defense Forces, it is very significant that most of the party representatives participating in this Commission agreed with the statement that "most of the opinions do not reject taking measures of some sort in accordance with the Constitution." It was revolutionary that most of the opinions supported Japan's active participation in the collective security operations of the United Nations and that issues such as limitations on the exercise of the right of collective self-defense were discussed.

>> An appropriate prescription for the future of Japan was provided by the mostly positive opinions concerning (a) the inclusion in the Constitution of "new human rights" such as environmental rights, the right to know, and the right to privacy; (b) while maintaining the bicameral system, making positive use of the merits of this system by clarifying the division of roles between the two Houses and clearly differentiating between methods of electing Diet Members; (c) the strengthening of prime ministerial leadership; (d) the establishment of a Constitutional Court, (e) the clarification of the "principle of local autonomy"; and (f) introduction of the do-shu system.

>> The fact that mostly positive opinions were expressed in favor of enacting a National Referendum Law for constitutional revision and establishing a permanent organ in the Diet to handle constitutional problems will serve as guidelines for future reviews of the Constitution.

>> I strongly hope that the framework of this Commission will be maintained so that it might serve as a forum for future discussions aimed at reviewing the Constitution and that it will conduct research on the Constitution and prepare a draft for and have the right to deliberate on a National Referendum Law.


EDANO Yukio (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> It is an unprecedented, epoch-making achievement that this Commission has been able to vigorously conduct research on the Constitution, raising a wide range of related issues and consulting the opinions of experts and ordinary citizens and, in particular, to engage in broad discussions on a future vision for Japan in the 21st century without being bound by the articles of the current Constitution. Since we do not have sufficient opportunities in the Diet to freely discuss the future of Japan from a wide perspective, this Commission has played an important role by enabling us to have this kind of open-minded discussion.

>> The deliberations of this Commission have essentially taken the form of free discussion in which the participating Diet Members have asked questions, debated and raised counterarguments. In so doing, it has fully played the crucial role of providing a forum for discussion, which is also important from a constitutional viewpoint.

>> The Report objectively expresses the results of the research conducted by the Commission without reaching any specific conclusions. The "majority opinion" is no more than an indication that, concerning the issues on which many members expressed their views, most of them held a certain opinion. This is a natural outcome of the Commission pursuing discussions in accordance with its assigned role of research and this Report objectively indicates the results of this research.

>> Bearing in mind that this is a discussion of the Constitution, which has vital significance as the basic law governing the exercise of governmental authority, that there are many themes to discuss and a wide range of opinions concerning them, and considering the situation when this Commission was established five years ago, it is a great achievement that this kind of Report has been put together. This Report does not represent the end but the beginning of an ongoing process. The important question now is how to make the most effective use of the research we have done so far.

>> Although this Commission has achieved certain results through its efforts to stimulate public opinion concerning issues related to the Constitution by publishing its discussions and seeking the opinions of citizens, who have the power to enact a constitution, their level of interest in Constitution cannot be said to be high. Since Diet Members can only make proposals concerning the revision of the Constitution and it is the people who make the final decision, it is essential that many citizens familiarize themselves with the discussions of the Commission through this Report and take an active part in this debate as "interested parties."

>> Deepening the discussion through dialogue with citizens while utilizing the results of research and developing procedural legislation for revising the Constitution are intimately interconnected in the effort to raise citizens' interest in the Constitution and raising their awareness as "interested parties." It is therefore appropriate for this Commission to play the role of integrating and promoting both these aspects. It is strongly hoped that the Commission will now proceed to the second stage of deepening discussion of the Constitution and developing procedural legislation for its revision and that this meaningful and fruitful debate will be further promoted.


AKAMATSU Masao (New Komeito)

>> Since it was promulgated, the current Constitution has played a very important role. The thorough observance of the three principles of popular sovereignty, fundamental human rights, and permanent pacifism are the basic stance of New Komeito.

>> I am frankly delighted that the initial aim of broad and comprehensive research on the Constitution has been achieved through these five years of discussion by this Commission.

>> This Commission's research has not been conducted with the prior aim of revising the Constitution. Its aim was to study how the Constitution is implemented, but in the course of this research, views were expressed frequently concerning amendment and the inclusion of additional provisions. The Report indicates the number of these views according to specific criteria.

>> Concerning this indication of the number of views, doubts were expressed by members of New Komeito that this might be contrary to the aims of the Commission. However, since the mere listing of opinions is not appropriate for a final report, the arrangement and indication of these views according to specific criteria is unavoidable.

>> A close examination of the discussions of the Commission shows that there are not so many articles that require revision. It also reveals that, in most cases, the underlying cause of the problem lies in the inadequate response of politics. We cannot ignore this and solve such problems simply by revising the Constitution. New Komeito believes that it is necessary to carefully consider from the perspective of what provisions should be amended or added to, or whether it is possible to respond by amending laws or the way they are administered by the executive branch, without changing the Constitution.

>> With regard to Article 9, in hurrying to eliminate the gap between this provision and reality, it cannot be denied that the ideal might be compromised to some extent. It is necessary to return to the principle of being a pillar for everlasting peace without sticking too rigidly to an explicit formulation whose purpose is to confirm the current situation.

>> Following the publication of this Report, it will be necessary to maintain the framework of the Commission as a forum for continuing discussion concerning what aspects of the Constitution should be kept as they are and what aspects should be changed and the form these changes should take. Regarding the procedures for the revision of the Constitution, since these are basically provided for in the Constitution itself, it will also be necessary to give this reconstituted body the right to vote only on a law governing the procedure for national referendums.

>> Rather than simply asserting that it has been a long time since the Constitution came into effect or making comparisons with the situation in other countries, we should pursue the course of calm and dispassionate discussion. While we are fully aware of the contents of this Report, New Komeito will steadfastly engage in discussion of the Constitution without being bound or restricted by it.


YAMAGUCHI Tomio (Japanese Communist Party)

>> This Commission was established with the aim of conducting broad and comprehensive research on the Constitution. It should therefore clarify its historical and contemporary significance and examine actual politics in the light of the principles of the Constitution. In fact, however, it has been imbued with a tendency towards amendment of the Constitution.

>> With regard to Article 9, views have been expressed concerning explicit stipulation of the exercise of the right of collective self-defense and amendment of the Preamble, but these views are unconvincing from the viewpoint of prospects for peace for Japan and the world.

>> Japan's uncritical support for the Iraq War, which the United States waged based on a doctrine of unilateralism and a preemptive strategy of attack, and its dispatch of the Self-Defense Forces to a region where war is continuing, have deeply scarred the peace principle of the Constitution. Serious attention should be paid to the unprecedented criticism and opposition of public opinion and the growing movement against Japan's involvement in Iraq. In this Research Commission also, informants and speakers have expressed strong criticism of this, pointing out that the realization of the principle of peace based on the UN Charter and Article 9 are vital for world peace.

>> The "new human rights" are rights that have been established by citizens' movements on the basis of provisions in the existing Constitution, such as Article 13 and Article 25. Our task is to change the current state of politics so that these rights can be enforced.

>> Rather than amending the Constitution, it is necessary, on the basis of its principles and contemporary awareness, to promote meaningful activities that observe and fully apply the Constitution in legislative, administrative, judicial and other spheres of politics and society.

>> Rather than recording the process and results of this kind of research, the Report has been organized for the purpose of revising the Constitution, thereby deviating from the Regulations of the Research Commission on the Constitution.

>> Regarding each article of the Constitution, including Article 9, the Report is organized mainly on what should or should not be explicitly stipulated. This is contrary to the spirit of this Commission, which is limited to research and is not supposed to reach specific conclusions. The method of "counting according to the number of members who expressed an opinion rather than the number of times it was expressed for each topic" and "indicating the opinion as held by most members when there are twice as many members holding that view," makes particularly significant the issue of revising the Constitution through the numbers of members in the Diet. Furthermore, by "categorization of members' opinions according to topics," such issues as "whether or not Japan's unique history, traditions and culture should be explicitly stated in the Preamble," and "whether matters relating to the family and home should be provided for in the Constitution" were brought up and, in effect, follow the arguments for revision of the Constitution proposed by the ruling parties and others.

>> In "The Future of the Constitutional Debate and Related Matters," the Report proposes the establishment of a permanent body to handle constitutional questions in the Diet, preparation of a Constitutional amendment procedure law, and empowerment of the reconstituted Research Commission on the Constitution to draw up and deliberate on this law. Such measures would open the way for the revision of Article 9 and are therefore unacceptable. Now that the Commission has completed the research planned "over a period of about five years" and submitted its Report to the Speaker of the House of Representatives, its proceedings should be unobtrusively brought to a close.

>> The Constitution of Japan is full of rich contents that can serve as guidelines for resolving issues relating to peace, the problems of citizens' lives, human rights and democracy, and the various challenges that Japan and the world face today.

>> Most citizens oppose the revision of Article 9 and will continue to advance towards the Japan of peace, human rights and democracy that the Constitution aims for. This will give us the prospect of opening up a new stage of peace and friendship in Asia and the rest of the world.


DOI Takako (Social Democratic Party)

>> The Constitution of Japan has its roots in the Japanese people's determination to learn from the terrible disaster that arose from allowing the military to run out of control before the war. It is founded on the constitutionalist principles of strictly regulating and limiting the power of the state and guaranteeing the sovereign rights of the people. The pacifism that permeates the Constitution of Japan represents the unified will and hopes of all the people of Japan.

>> Bound by the provisions of Article 9, Japan did not participate in the Korean War or the Vietnam War, thereby gaining recognition from the rest of the world as a nation with a peace constitution.

>> The resolution of problems by force has resulted in the deaths of many people, as well as destroying the foundations of their livelihood and the natural environment. To all the people who oppose war and strive passionately to restore peace throughout the world, I want to hold up the pacifist principle of Article 9 with confidence, pride and courage.

>> Although most citizens want the government to pursue politics informed by the Constitution, many Diet Members who have the obligation to respect and uphold the Constitution do not faithfully implement its principles and even make statements that reject and break these principles, pursuing the revision of the Constitution with their sights set on Article 9 in particular.

>> The stated objective of the Research Commission on the Constitution is to conduct broad and comprehensive research on the Constitution. It should therefore have investigated whether or not the ideals of the Constitution are actually being upheld, the reasons and responsibility for this, and ways in which these ideals can be realized. However, in response to the number of members who advocate constitutional revision, criticism of the present Constitution and opinions about what articles should be changed and how they should be changed have been made the focus of discussions and an overall direction towards revision has been created. Most of the Commission's time has been devoted to discussions about changing the Constitution to match the reality of enactment of laws that infringe the Constitution or about increasing citizens' duties rather than redressing and realizing their human rights.

>> The presentation of summaries of issues toward Constitutional revision by the three parties — the Liberal Democratic Party, the Democratic Party of Japan, and New Komeito — and discussion of these presentations conducted at the session of the Commission on August 5, 2004, was clearly against the declared aims of this Commission and lacked fairness and impartiality.

>> Unfortunately, this Commission often failed to meet a quorum in the course of its discussions concerning the supreme law of the land and cannot escape the censure of irresponsibility regarding the future of democratic and constitutional politics. Furthermore, it did not even meet the normal requirement that a meeting of the Commission should be held to determine the editing guidelines and contents of the Report.

>> Although many of the informants and the speakers at the open hearings and regional open hearings stressed the importance of making effective use of the Constitution rather than changing it, these opinions were condensed in the editing process and the broad and diverse views expressed have not been faithfully recorded.

>> The Report dilutes the diversity of problem awareness and differences in nuance. It categorizes views according to arbitrary criteria designed to create a majority opinion, thereby indicating an orientation towards constitutional revision.

>> Research and statements from the viewpoint of utilizing the existing Constitution are insufficient in the extreme. There are hardly any allusions to the international and domestic significance and historical importance of the fact that the Constitution prohibits the exercise of the right of collective self-defense. Furthermore, "The Future of the Constitutional Debate and Related Matters" went so far as to include opinions on a permanent body to handle Constitutional questions in the Diet and a Constitutional amendment procedure law. These themes themselves clearly deviate from the stated objectives of the Commission and their inclusion in the Report is quite unacceptable.

>> I strongly oppose the way this Commission has been administered and the Report drawn up with the above-mentioned orientation and contents and wish to express my anger and deep regret concerning this. Aspiring towards a 21st century in which nations renounce war and resolve disputes through dialogue, I appeal to all Japanese people to take a strong interest in this constitutional crisis and to make every effort to protect and make full use of the Constitution of Japan.