No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 07 May 2025
Is it time to bring Japan's postwar experiment in liberal democracy to an end? Prime Minister Abe Shinzo and his followers seem to think so. In April 2012, the LDP published a clear blueprint for constitutional revision that would go a long way toward achieving this goal.
The Liberal Democratic Party has advocated fundamental revision of Japan's Constitution since its founding in 1955. Nearly seven decades after the end of World War II, LDP leaders remain humiliated by the thought that the country is governed under a constitution largely drafted by a team of foreign military officers. Abe is working hard to build a coalition with the power to rip the “imposed constitution” out by its philosophical roots. He and his followers, who dominate the LDP, envision an “autonomous constitution” (jishu kenpō) that would radically adjust the balance between government power and individual rights.
1 The story of the drafting of the “MacArthur Constitution” and its subsequent modifications is available in many sources. For example, see Eiji Takemae, The Allied Occupation of Japan (Continuum, 2002), especially pp. 274-292.
2 See “Draft Reform to Japan's Constitution, Q & A,” (nihon koku kenpō kaisei sōan Q&A), p.2, available at this address. This pamphlet was published by the LDP in October 2012. It includes a complete text of the LDP revision proposals together with brief commentaries in Q & A format. (Hereinafter, “LDP Q&A”) All translations of texts of LDP constitutional proposals and of excerpts from the LDP Q&A pamphlet that appear in this article were made by the author, who has sole responsibility for accuracy.
3 LDP Q&A, p. 14.
4 Drafting and negotiation of the terms of Japan's Constitution and the Universal Declaration are contemporary events. The UN Commission on Human Rights, which drafted the Universal Declaration, was formed in June 1946. For an engaging portrait of the creation of the Universal Declaration, see Mary Ann Glendon, A World Made New - Eleanor Roosevelt and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Random House, 2001).
5 LDP Q&A, p. 14.
6 For descriptions of recent Supreme Court decisions involving fundamental human rights, see Lawrence Repeta, “Limiting Fundamental Rights Protection in Japan - the Role of the Supreme Court,” in Jeff Kingston (ed.) Critical Issues in Contemporary Japan (Routledge, 2013) (forthcoming).
7 The Kyūen Renraku Center 救援連絡センター) maintains a continuous report of arrests and other police actions related to public demonstrations. See here. Police officials know they can employ the kind of heavy-handed tactics used in the Tachikawa case whenever it suits them. In a recent example, in December 2012 Osaka protesters were subject to extended detention for harmless speech activities. As in the 2004 Tachikawa Three Case, the police took the opportunity to search homes and offices and seize computers, files and other materials. Also like the Tachikawa case, the police did not make the arrests and seizures until many weeks after the incidents they cited as crimes. For details concerning the Osaka case, see here. The Osaka case is cited in Tessa Morris-Suzuki, “Freedom of Hate Speech; Abe Shinzō and Japan's Public Sphere,” The Asia-Pacific Journal, Volume 11, Issue 8, No. 1, February 25, 2013. http://www.japanfocus.org/-Tessa-Morris_Suzuki/3902 The courts have also endorsed broad government authority to set restrictive conditions on public demonstrations. In another 2012 example, Tokyo metropolitan government simply denied a permit for a demonstration in Hibiya Park against nuclear power on the grounds that it would obstruct management of the park. This denial was upheld in court. “AntiNuclear Activists Denied Use of Park”.
8 LDP Q&A, p. 14
9 Stanford Encyclopedia Entry: Constitutionalism
10 Kazuyuki Takahashi, “Why Do We Study Constitutional Law of Foreign Countries, and How?” in Vicki C. Jackson and Mark Tushnet, Defining the Field of Comparative Law (Praeger, 2002), p. 45.
11 The Supreme Court's strong support for the police when they confront political activists is the legacy of a restructuring of the Court executed by LDP governments during the early 1970s. This was an era of frequent clashes between masses of demonstrators and riot police that sometimes turned violent. For a description of the response by LDP leaders and the resulting shift in the Supreme Court, see Lawrence Repeta, “Reserved Seats on Japan's Supreme Court,” Vol 88 No 6, Washington University Law Review 1713 (2011), especially 1724——1744, available at this location.
12 For an authoritative study of the successful role of Article 9 in restraining the Japanese government from war, see Craig Martin, “Binding the Dogs of War: Japan and the Constitutionalizing of Jus Ad Bellum,” available at this address.
13 A group of scholars formed in May 2013 to oppose this move, led by University of Tokyo emeritus constitutional law professor Higuchi Yoichi. See here.
14 The White House report on the meeting is available at this address.
15 First Black Elected to Head Harvard Law Review]
16 See, e.g., here
You have
Access
Open access