Fourth Meeting

Thursday, October 20, 2005

Meeting Agenda

Matters relating to a national referendum system for constitutional amendment and the Constitution of Japan

(Morning)


After statements were heard from Mr. IMAI Hajime and Mr. YOSHIOKA Shinobu concerning the above matters, questions were put to them.

(Afternoon)

Free discussion was held among the members on the above matters.

Informants:

  • IMAI Hajime, Journalist and Secretary General of the Group of Citizens for Making Proper National Referendum Rules
  • YOSHIOKA Shinobu, Writer

Members who put questions to Mr. IMAI and Mr. YOSHIOKA

Main points of Mr. IMAI's statement

1. Encounter with national referendums and local referendums

>> I covered the various national referendums held in Russia and elsewhere during East Europe's democratization process that began in 1989. Since 1995, I have been covering various local referendums held throughout Japan. I will state what I have learned from these experiences.

>> A national referendum was held in Lithuania in 1991 on whether to secede from the Soviet Union. The most important decision for the nation was being made under the threat of invasion by Soviet troops. The people were putting their lives on the line to conduct this national referendum and to determine the future of their nation. As seen from this, national referendums are very serious affairs sometimes conducted under the threat of death.

2. National referendums held in Switzerland and France

[1] National referendum in Switzerland

>> During 2004, a national referendum was held in Switzerland concerning the construction of roads, revision of the law concerning property rental leasing, and life imprisonment of persons convicted of serious offenses involving sexual assault and violence. Pro and con campaign activities that preceded the referendum can be characterized as follows: (a) both pro and con camps were, as a rule, free to distribute flyers and put up posters; (b) civil servants were free to participate in campaign activities in a personal capacity during non-working hours; (c) fairness was required in advocacy ads appearing in newspapers, but no legal restrictions applied; (d) broadcasting of political ads on television and radio was forbidden; and, (e) newspapers and the Internet were not subject to any form of regulation.

>> Basically, the media are completely independent of the government and parliament. Newspapers as well as both public and private broadcasting media are free of any form of intervention by the government and parliament.

>> All eligible voters received an envelope containing the following: a pamphlet containing a neutral explanation of the issue and the views and position of the government's referendum drafting committee; and, separate ballots for each of the issues of the referendum to be marked "Yes" or "No." While ballot boxes were placed in waiting rooms in railways stations, the principal method of voting was by mail.

[2] National referendum in France

>> During 2005, a national referendum was held in France concerning ratification of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe. The referendum campaign can be characterized as follows: (a) advocacy ads were forbidden during the campaign period; and, (b) various regulations applied to television broadcasts, such as broadcasting during a predetermined time frame and allotment of time to political parties proportionate to party size.

>> At the time of this referendum, French citizens residing in Japan enthusiastically discussed the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe and voted at the French Embassy and Consulates. Such comments were heard as, "The outcome was not what I hoped, but I have no complaint against deciding the matter in a national referendum." Persons with differing positions may remain unconvinced when the government or parliament makes a major decision. However, the minority is more accepting when the decision is made through national referendum.

3. Manifesto on national referendum

>> The gap between Article 9 and current reality can be removed by revising Article 9 in a national referendum to reflect the reality. However, if revision of Article 9 is rejected in a national referendum, the gap will persist. Would it then be acceptable to leave matters as they stand? I would like to ask that some form of measure be applied in such an eventuality.

4. People's understanding of procedures for constitutional revision

>> According to opinion polls, a majority of the people believes that a national referendum system should be introduced to deal with important national questions. However, the same polls show that very few people have an accurate understanding of the procedures for constitutional revision. Efforts will have to be made to promote a better understanding among the people.

Main points of Mr. YOSHIOKA's statement

1. Preconditions to discussing a national referendum law for constitutional amendment

>> The present Constitution is the product of heartfelt regret and reflection on the Asian and Pacific War. Not only has it contributed to economic and social affluence, but it has also given solace and security to the people of those countries upon whom Japan brought the horrors of war.

>> The acceptance or rejection of a national referendum law for constitutional amendment depends on one thing. How can "public space" (social forum for consensus building) be designed to ensure the maximum level of free participation by everyone in discussions concerning the history and current status of the present Constitution and its future possibilities and limitations?

>> A national referendum system can be the starting point for creating and firmly establishing a spirit of free and active discussion in the life of the people.

2. Participation of "youth" in national referendums

>> Because the youth will live for the longest number of years under the influence of the Constitution, they should be given the right to vote. This is also important from an educational perspective in that it will provide the youth with an opportunity to examine what kind of society they want to live in.

3. Participation of "foreigners" in national referendums

>> The trust developed by postwar Japan with international society may be undermined if the constitutional debate is restricted to within Japan. Also, international feedback on the Constitution will provide us with invaluable reference material. The system should be designed to deepen mutual understanding with foreign residents of Japan and Japan's neighboring countries.

4. Avoiding restrictions on media, criticism and freedom of expression

>> The media today provide a forum for the expression of views and opinions. Correct arguments, false arguments and extreme arguments are all vetted in this process. The vetting capabilities of Japanese society should not be underestimated.

>> Because of various concerns, we may be tempted to include some vaguely worded restrictions on "false information" in the national referendum law. However, this may very easily result in restrictions on the freedom of expression. This will cause atrophy in the constitutional debate and runs the risk of reducing public interest in the Constitution. The only activity that should be restricted is "expressions of threats hinting at physical harm."

5. Adequate campaign period for national referendums

>> The mass media and Internet convey information almost instantaneously. But this has not shortened the time we need to think. Also, a certain amount of time is needed if the constitutional debates carried out in the "public space" are to enrich Japanese society. Therefore, a campaign period of no less than six months should be instituted.

6. Voting method

>> If several amendments are to be voted on in the same referendum, it would be absurd to vote on a "single package." A method should be devised so that each proposed amendment can be voted on separately.

7. Defining "majority" in national referendums

>> The Constitution is the basic law for all the people of the land. The wording of Article 96 should be perceived as a declaration expressing the extreme importance of constitutional amendment and the need to involve all the people in deciding on amendment. If voter turnout is low, a national referendum may give birth to an amendment that has not been approved by the "majority" of the people. Therefore, "majority" should be defined as the "majority of all eligible voters."

Main points of questions and comments to Mr. IMAI and Mr. YOSHIOKA

MIHARA Asahiko (Liberal Democratic Party)

(To both informants)

>> I believe freedom of the media should be fundamentally ensured in national referendum campaigns. However, what are your views on "false" reporting?

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> What measures are taken in local referendums in Japan and national referendums in foreign countries when "false" reporting and "exaggerated" reporting become rampant?

>> In some cases, a certain percentage of the public may petition the government to hold a referendum because they feel there is an extremely important matter to be decided on. How are such cases handled in other countries?

>> National referendums are frequently held in Switzerland. Is there no criticism of the economic cost entailed?


SUZUKI Katsumasa (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

(To both informants)

>> What are your views on the minimum voting age in national referendums? Should it be 18, or should it be 20?

>> What are your views on voting on a single unified package versus voting separately on each question? When several related provisions are being voted on, these could be combined into a single unit in the ballot. What are your views on this matter?

>> When a number of provisions are to be combined into a single unit in the ballot, who is empowered to decide whether the components of the unit are "divisible or indivisible?" Given that Article 96 empowers the Diet to initiate amendments, can it be interpreted that this power lies with the Diet?

>> What are your views on the neutrality of the government's publicity activities?


TAKAGI Yosuke (New Komeito)

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> You have referred to the importance of "study well, think well and discuss well" in the summary of your statement. In order to achieve this, how long do you think the publicity period should be in national referendums for constitutional amendment?

(To Mr. YOSHIOKA)

>> I believe restrictions on campaigning activities in national referendums should be avoided as much as possible. What is your view on emotional or mental harm done in campaigning?

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> Regarding restrictions on the media, in the case of Switzerland, political ads on television and radio are forbidden. That is, broadcast media and print media are subject to different sets of rules and regulations. Is this difference in treatment based on differences in influence or differences in cost?

>> In the case of Japan, considering their influence, should television and other broadcast media be subject to different rules and regulations than those applied to the print media?

(To Mr. YOSHIOKA)

>> Regarding conditions for ratification in national referendums, you have stated that ratification should require a "majority of all eligible voters" because abstention also constitutes a form of expression. Can you elaborate on this matter?

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> Assume ratification requires a majority of all eligible voters. The average voter turnout in national referendums held in Switzerland is 45 percent. Most initiatives would be defeated just for poor turnout. What is your view on this matter?


KASAI Akira (Japanese Communist Party)

(To both informants)

>> Recently, we suddenly find political parties and Diet members advocating enactment of a national referendum law for constitutional amendment. I believe this is part of an effort to place constitutional revision on a specific time schedule. What are your views on the relation between advocating constitutional revision and advocating the enactment of procedures for national referendums?

(To Mr. YOSHIOKA)

>> Recently, politics has been moving toward acting unconstitutionally with the intent of later revising the Constitution to render those acts constitutional. How do you think this affects our relations with neighboring countries?

>> The ruling government parties have created a society in which people are arrested simply for distributing leaflets, a society in which spiritual freedom is violated. I feel very uncomfortable and alienated by the argument that popular sovereignty cannot be ensured unless legislation is enacted for national referendum procedures. What is your view on this matter?

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> Some argue that Article 96 itself should be reconsidered to allow provisions pertaining to the organs of state to be amended without national referendum. What is your response to this position?


TSUJIMOTO Kiyomi (Social Democratic Party)

(To Mr. YOSHIOKA)

>> Can you describe in detail your opinion on the participation of foreign nationals in Japan in national referendum campaign activities?

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> What provisions are made for national referendum campaigning by immigrants and other foreign residents in national referendums held in France?

>> While the Diet is engaged in heated discussions every week, opinion polls show the public does not necessarily have a very deep understanding of constitutional amendment procedures. What is your view of this difference in interest? What measures do you think can be taken to reduce this gap?

(To Mr. YOSHIOKA)

>> It is obvious that freedom of expression must be guaranteed. But I believe it is the public's distrust of the media that lies at the base of the movement to restrict the activities of the media in national referendum campaigns. What is your view of the role and position of the media in national referendums?

>> You stated that it was your hope that this Special Committee would engage in deep and thorough discussion. What do you think would be the most desirable way for discussions to be held in this Special Committee?


TAKI Makoto (People's New Party)

(To both informants)

>> What are your views on the materials that the Diet may make available to the public when it has initiated a constitutional amendment?

(To Mr. IMAI)

>> In Switzerland and France, how do people view the neutrality of the media?

(To both informants)

>> Regarding voting methods, what are your views on voting by mail? It was stated that voting by mail is permitted in some foreign countries. Have such countries instituted countermeasures to prevent certain groups from gathering ballots and mailing them in?


Main points of comments made by members in free discussion (in order of presentation)
Main points of initial round of comments by representatives of each party

YOSHIDA Rokuzaemon (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Japan's response to the North Korean abductions is tantamount to admitting that Japan is not a sovereign nation. We must aim to revise and create a Constitution that ultimately does not shy away from the use of military force in ensuring the safety of each individual citizen.

>> International cooperation by the Self-Defense Forces should be based on a permanent law, not special laws enacted for each separate case of participation. A decision should be made on whether this should be written into the Constitution or enacted as a piece of separate legislation. Laws must also be enacted concerning the use of arms.

>> Constitutional revision must be designed to promote the interests of the nation. National interests can be divided into permanent ones and ones that change over time. Provisions concerning the former category should be written into the Constitution.


SONODA Yasuhiro (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> There may be some doubts concerning the legitimacy of the present Constitution and its continuity from the previous constitution. However, I believe there are no objections to the position that the three principles of popular sovereignty, pacifism and respect for fundamental human rights provide the best foundation for the governance of the nation.

>> To ensure freedom and fairness in national referendums, the following principles should be adopted concerning restrictions on campaign activities: (a) to provide for positive and active participation of the people in related discussions, "zero restrictions" should be made the starting point; (b) restrictions on the media should be kept to minimum necessary levels; and, (c) penalties should be applied per the criminal code and other existing laws instead of creating new laws and provisions.


OTA Akihiro (New Komeito)

>> This Special Committee should avoid debate on specific articles and provisions in its discussions. Instead, it is important that we arrive at a shared vision concerning voting methods and other aspects of the national referendum system.

>> New Komeito advocates "adding to the Constitution." This connotes the following: acknowledging the excellence of the present Constitution; preserving the three fundamental principles of the Constitution, as well as Paragraphs 1 and 2 of Article 9 in their present form; and, adding new provisions concerning environmental rights, privacy rights and other rights that conform to the developments of the age. Paragraph 2 of Article 96 states that amendments when ratified form "an integral part of this Constitution." As such, the Constitution has in mind the concept of "adding to the Constitution," a concept that draws from the example of the amendment process for the U.S. Constitution.

>> Continuity is demanded of the Constitution, and the Constitution must be decided upon by the people. Therefore, the amendment process must be a precise one. The revision drafts that have been prepared by various political parties must be clearly differentiated from the actual amendment process.

>> The number of provisions to be amended will be limited. Therefore, I assume that each individual amendment will be proposed separately. It will be necessary to discuss specific methods to be adopted in voting on individual questions.

>> Concerning the following points, we must engage in wide ranging discussions, while taking into account the experiences of other countries: the length of the publicity period in national referendums; methods for informing and educating the public; and, application of restrictions on campaigning activities.


KASAI Akira (Japanese Communist Party)

>> Demands to develop a national referendum system did not arise from the people. This is all about preparing the groundwork for revising the Constitution centered on the revision of Article 9.

>> The public does not have a full understanding of provisions pertaining to constitutional revision. This is a manifestation of the failure of past administrations to bring the Constitution to life in the lives of the people.

>> The ruling parties argue that enactment of a national referendum system will give concrete shape to popular sovereignty. This line of argument is unconvincing because the rightful exercise of popular sovereignty is at the same time being violated by the arrest and indictment of persons handing out anti-war leaflets.

>> On September 30, the Osaka High Court handed down its ruling on unconstitutionality. It is the prime minister who bears the heaviest burden of respecting and upholding the Constitution in compliance with the provisions of Article 99. Therefore, the prime minister should have cancelled his visit to Yasukuni Shrine following the ruling. It is absolutely unacceptable to amend Paragraph 3 of Article 20 to condone the paying of homage to Yasukuni Shrine by the prime minister.

>> Diplomacy is the principal actor in national security. Peaceful and diplomatic means must be employed in resolving the conflicts in the world today. We must live by this principle. The assignment of priority to military means in national security policies runs counter to this principle.

>> Mr. YOSHIOKA said we must work to further strengthen popular sovereignty, to further fortify the principle of renunciation of war and to further reinforce respect for fundamental human rights. It is extremely important to view the Constitution from this perspective.


TSUJIMOTO Kiyomi (Social Democratic Party)

>> Looking at the questionnaire results mentioned by Mr. IMAI, I was surprised by how very few people had any accurate knowledge of constitutional amendment procedures. We must make sure that the gap between the Diet and the people in whom sovereignty resides does not increase any further. For that purpose, this Special Committee should begin by engaging in discussions aimed at deepening the public's awareness of constitutional amendment procedures.

>> The Constitution provides rules for restricting the exercise of power. For this reason, restrictions on campaigning in national referendums should target the government, not the people or the media. We should confirm what the government is allowed to do.

>> The government should adopt a passive stance in national referendums. Equal and fair treatment of both pro and con views finds its basis in the fundamental principle of popular sovereignty. It will be necessary for us to take ample time to discuss what measures can be put in place to ensure neutral and fair treatment.

>> Initiation of constitutional amendment is subject to a concurring vote of two-thirds or more of all the members of each House. The intent of this provision is that constitutional amendment must be approached with great care and caution. After an amendment has been initiated, both pro and con views must be treated equally.


TAKI Makoto (People's New Party)

>> We can expect the public's understanding of constitutional amendment procedures to deepen as discussions of amendment rules go forward.

>> Regarding the treatment of the media in the national referendum law, one option would be for the media to voluntarily refrain from reporting on all matters outside of formal debate meetings. However, it would be difficult to write this into law. Therefore, this Special Committee should prompt the media in the direction of taking voluntary action.

>> We should engage in discussions of specific voting methods. In so doing, we should consider various technical issues, such as voting by mail, that is permitted in various foreign countries.

>> Restricting the participation of foreign nationals in campaign activities of national referendums for constitutional amendment involves some difficult problems.

>> The national referendum system for constitutional amendment should be considered in light of specific conditions and situations. The discussion should proceed separately of any consideration of what we think the Constitution should look like.


Comments after the first round

FUNADA Hajime (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> A very clear distinction must be made between general national referendums, local referendums and national referendums for constitutional amendment. A general national referendum system will require wide-ranging discussions that take into account the conditions of indirect and direct democracy. For this reason, we should start by working on a national referendum system for constitutional amendment.

>> I am in agreement with the statement made by Mr. YOSHIOKA concerning the need to create a space in which all people can freely participate in discussions and freely arrive at their own decisions. The right to participate in national referendum campaigns should be extended to the youth and to foreigners residing in Japan. However, from the perspective of national sovereignty, certain restrictions should apply to organized campaign activities by foreign residents.

>> The definition of false reporting remains ambiguous. However, the provisions of the current Public Offices Election Law should apply.

>> Taking into account low voter turnout rates and the large number of abstentions due to simple laziness, "majority" should not be defined to be the majority of all eligible voters.

>> The scope of eligible voters should not be age-based, such as 18 years and older. Instead, eligibility should be based on the age of high school graduation.


SHIBAYAMA Masahiko (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> It is very important to educate the public on constitutional amendment procedures. It is also important to ensure participation in voting by Japanese citizens living abroad by providing information and other means.

>> The concept of "public space" is important from the perspective of ensuring freedom of campaigning in national referendums and in creating a free market for ideas. Nevertheless, it is the media and the government that will have a decisive influence over the people's voting behavior. Therefore, it will be necessary to further discuss problems pertaining to the media and the government.

>> It may be all right to include provisions for nullification of the results of a national referendum, but I am certainly opposed to the idea that a constitutional amendment does not take force until final decisions have been handed down by the courts in all legal actions for nullification. From the perspective of respecting the will of the people, I am also opposed to the use of temporary injunctions and suspension of enforcement. On this matter, I believe the U.S. system of avoidance of judicial judgment will serve us as the best reference.

>> Regarding voting methods, we must bear in mind that the people do not have the right to revise a proposed constitutional amendment. For this reason, we should adopt the principle of separate voting on each individual initiative. If the Preamble is to be revised, the revision should cover the entire Preamble and should not be undertaken paragraph by paragraph.


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

(Responding to comments made by Mr. SHIBAYAMA)

>> We are not proposing the use of a conventional temporary injunction. Our proposal was that there may be some room for establishing a new legal concept that resembles a temporary injunction.

(Responding to comments made by Mr. FUNADA)

>> Unlike in national elections, one cannot imagine a specific instance of false reporting in a national referendum, and it is going to be very difficult to make a judgment on false reporting. Therefore, false reporting should be counteracted not through legal regulation but through the process of debate and the free exchange of opinions.


TAKAICHI Sanae (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> Even if national referendums are held independently of any other election, there still is the risk of confusion with national or local elections that are being held at around the same time. For this reason, I am very concerned with any discussion of expanding the scope of voters and participants in campaign activities to include foreign residents and youth beyond the rules that apply in national elections.

>> The argument has been made that restrictions on campaign activities in national referendums should be less strict than the restrictions that currently apply under the Public Offices Election Law. However, we cannot put aside the concern that in constitutional amendment, slander campaigns and destructive activities will occur because of the greater political conflict involved than what is seen in national elections.

>> Though sovereignty resides in the people, it is not possible to have everyone vote in national referendums. Therefore, I am opposed to those who say that the scope of eligible voters should be expanded because constitutional amendments affect the entire population.


HANASHI Yasuhiro (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> It cannot be said that the present Constitution lacks legal legitimacy. On the other hand, opinion polls show that 60 percent of the people favor constitutional amendment. Given this situation, it is necessary to act to generate a true love for the Constitution in the people. If at some time in the future Japan begins to accept significant numbers of immigrants, there is no other option but to require them to pledge allegiance to the Constitution. For that purpose, we need a Constitution that can serve as a foundation and refuge for the people.

>> When constitutional amendment proposals are presented in a national referendum, there should, in principle, be separate voting on each individual amendment.

>> The first time a national referendum for constitutional amendment is undertaken, the publicity period should be relatively long to allow for the deepening of public debate and to nurture an awareness in the people that they are participating in the process of nation building. Some formal rules and arrangements should be adopted to prevent overlapping between national elections and the publicity period.


HAYAKAWA Chuko (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> National referendum for constitutional amendment is a form of participation in the affairs of state. The absence of a national referendum law has prevented the people from expressing their will. This situation cannot avoid being labeled legislative nonfeasance.

>> As Japan has no previous experience with national referendums, it is important to learn from the examples of other countries.

>> The process of constitutional amendment begins with examination of individual articles and provisions, and moves on from there to the examination of the Preamble in light of the preceding discussions. Therefore, if the Preamble is to be amended, the proposed amendments should be initiated as a unified package.


AKAMATSU Masao (New Komeito)

>> My understanding is as follows. Those favoring amendment want to allow for the right of collective self-defense by moving in the direction of expanding the current interpretation of Article 9. As opposed to this, those favoring the preservation of the Constitution as it presently stands want to reorganize the Self-Defense Forces by moving in the direction of narrowing the current interpretation of Article 9. Even if amendment of Article 9 is rejected in a national referendum, this does not mean that the Self-Defense Forces will have to be reorganized. All it means is that we will retain the current interpretation.

>> Personally, I subscribe to the position of "adding to the Constitution" and believe that a third paragraph should be added to Article 9 in order to establish and finalize the interpretation of Paragraph 2.

>> A proposed constitutional amendment will be submitted to a national referendum only after it has been debated in the Diet. By the time it reaches the referendum stage, the content of the proposed amendment will be clear and unambiguous.


OGAWA Junya (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> It concerns me that development of constitutional amendment procedures is moving ahead without any reference to specifically how the Constitution is to be amended. It is necessary for the two processes to proceed in parallel and for the content of prospective amendment to be made known.

(Responding to comments made by Mr. FUNADA&)

>> The experiences of foreign countries show that the people have a growing need for a system for general national referendums.


YOSHIDA Rokuzaemon (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> The informant referred to the Swiss case. But we must remember that Japan is very different from Switzerland in terms of size, ethnic characteristics and national context. We must try to design a national referendum system that corresponds to Japanese conditions.


IWAKUNI Tetsundo (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

>> It is problematic that Japanese citizens living abroad have been deprived of the right to vote.

>> The problem with the Constitution of Japan is that it was never approved by a national referendum and the people have no sense of pride and love for the Constitution because it is not their own handiwork. The national referendum system should be established as soon as possible to allow as many people as possible, particularly those who have experienced the war to participate in the voting.


SHIBAYAMA Masahiko (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> It is fine to take the Swiss example into consideration when discussing a national referendum system for Japan. However, there are many problems in looking at Japan and Switzerland in the same way, including the difference in size and other considerations.

>> With a population exceeding 100 million and so many issues to be clarified, I believe it will prove extremely difficult to put every technical issue to a national referendum. This problem will not go away even if we opt for long publicity periods. Moreover, national referendums will not necessarily lead to valid decisions and conclusions. At the very least, only those national referendums that pertain to fundamental matters should be binding. As for local referendums, this matter should be considered on a case-by-case basis.


FUNADA Hajime (Liberal Democratic Party)

(Responding to comments made by Mr. OGAWA)

>> The question has been raised concerning the order in which we should discuss a general national referendum system and a referendum system for constitutional amendment. A general national referendum system contains a number of complex questions such as: which should be given priority, indirect democracy or direct democracy; and, to what degree would the outcome of a general national referendum have binding power over the government. Because of these complexities, I believe that we should start by discussing the national referendum system for constitutional amendment, which is a very basic problem.

>> A national referendum for constitutional amendment represents the ultimate form of choice between policies. On the other hand, national elections involve a choice between people. Hence, it is only natural for the relevant restrictions to differ. Nevertheless, it is also necessary to enact restrictions on reporting in national referendums that is obviously and objectively false.

(Comment)

>> Member of the House of Councillors YANASE Susumu has characterized the House of Representatives' Research Commission on the Constitution as focused on identifying and raising issues, and the House of Councillors' Research Commission on the Constitution as focused on deepening the discussion. After our separate deliberations have reached their culmination, the deliberative bodies of the two Houses should meet in joint sessions for further discussion on the model of the Joint Meeting of Both Houses on Social Security System Reform.


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

>> It cannot be denied that there may be some reporting that is completely at variance with the truth. However, should any major media company engage in reporting that is obviously and objectively false, it will certainly be heavily sanctioned by society. It will also be difficult to define what constitutes reporting. For these reasons, while it may be productive to discuss instructive forms of regulations, there is no need to include punitive provisions.

(Responding to comments made by Ms. TAKAICHI)

>> Regarding restrictions on the participation of foreign nationals in national referendum campaign activities, it will be very difficult to differentiate between organized activities and the exercise of freedom of expression. As a practical matter, differentiation is nearly impossible.


YASUOKA Okiharu (Liberal Democratic Party)

(Responding to comments made by Mr. EDANO)

>> It will be difficult to define what constitutes "falsehood" in discussions of constitutional amendment.

(Comment)

>> The following rules applied in the national referendum held in France for the ratification of the Treaty Establishing a Constitution for Europe. Organizations seeking to engage in campaigning activities had to satisfy certain conditions. Organizations meeting these requirements were allotted broadcasting time in the public broadcasting system. Moreover, the government granted subsidies to these organizations to defray campaign expenses. In the case of Japan, the following type of arrangement could be considered. When an amendment has been initiated, the Speaker of the Lower House and the President of the Upper House would jointly present the proposed amendment to the public together with a summarization of the proposal. Organizations that satisfy certain conditions would then present their views on the proposed amendment. In any case, we need to establish fair and equitable rules concerning campaign activities in national referendums for constitutional amendment.


OGAWA Junya (Democratic Party of Japan and Club of Independents)

(Responding to comments made by Mr. YOSHIDA)

>> It will be difficult for Japan to create a national referendum system on a par with the Swiss system. However, this is the direction in which the world is moving, and we too must consider the necessity of adopting such a system.

(Responding to comments made by Mr. FUNADA)

>> The national referendum system for constitutional amendment requires very careful consideration and discussion. However, I am skeptical of discussions in which amendment procedures are examined apart from any specific proposal for constitutional amendment.

>> We should also discuss a general national referendum system.


HANASHI Yasuhiro (Liberal Democratic Party)

>> No constitutional amendment has been initiated as of yet. Therefore, "national referendum campaigning" has no conceptual reality. Any activity that may be engaged in will come under political activities in general. If national referendum campaigning is a form of political activity, then the provisions of the Political Funds Control Law will apply to all organizations and entities engaged in such campaigning. Hence, it will be necessary to coordinate and harmonize the two.