No. 1260 Government Enforces to Amend Article Nine
It is eleven years since the Commission on Constitution of the House of Representatives started debates. Today it holds meetings almost every week, infringing its customary rule ‘to proceed arguments on the basis of accords between the ruling and opposition political parties’. The parliament has accelerated debates on revising the constitution since February when the Diet session dealt with budget compilation.
DON’T ALLOW COMMISSION TO GO WITH VIOLENT SPEED
Decision by majority – Is it right?
The Commission on Constitution has adopted lately a decision by majority that the ‘presence’ of members, which is provided by Article 56 of the Constitution, ‘can be interpreted that it includes online participation’. It has held only four meetings to involve in the issue of ‘online attendance’. It insists that the opinion held by majority is the main stream. Solely the Communist Party expressed objection.
The decision-making process was so quick to ‘easily reach the conclusion’: this means the majority of the commission’s total members could interpret the constitution. It is properly the House Steering Committee that is responsible for authorizing the ‘presence’. The commission deviates its jurisdiction. Such reckless behaviors cannot be accepted.
An article on emergency situation
Separately, an issue ‘online Diet sessions’ was discussed earlier: how to maintain Diet function under some emergency. The arguments, however, have swiftly rolled down to debates of an article on exigency. The prior talk has led to ‘the subject’, being as a pump.
Concerning creation of the article on contingency, all political parties and groups in the Diet are in favor, except for the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP), the Social Democratic Party and the Communist Party; the current debates imply counteractions to cope with not only natural disasters and infectious diseases but also wars and armed conflicts, taking advantage of the Russian intrusion to Ukraine. Open discussions are going on in the Diet to restrict the fundamental human rights. According to the text steered by ex-premier Abe on revising the constitution, an article on national emergency provides only measures to tackle natural disasters, including ’extension of the term of lawmakers’ and ‘emergency administrative orders’. Today’s debates in the commission, however, extend to a comprehensive article to meet contingencies, relying on the LDP’S draft to rewrite Constitution (2012).
The Ishin (=Innovation) Party, which is the frontrunner for constitution amendment, asserts an immediate adoption by the Diet of the request of an exceptional term of lawmakers.
Article Nine is the target for alteration
The Commission on Constitution changes phases every week; concerning the bill to change the National Referendum Act (to revise three articles along with the Public Office Election Law), debates began in the Diet coercively late April. Advocates of constitutional amendment are to arrange complete conditions for them to present a proposal for a change, avoiding sincere debates how to rightly modify Article 4, Appendix of the said plebiscite law, which provides restrictions on advertisement by TV, radio and internet.
The commission held two meetings after the May holidays, discussing intensively national security. The LDP representatives say that it is inadequate for a sovereign state to lack an article to defend the nation: it ardently insisted on description of the Self Defense Forces onto Article Nine. Meanwhile, those from the CDP raised stern objection to the stance that rewriting Article Nine should be made prerequisite.
The Ishin Party, too, has issued its draft text to change Article Nine to provide an outline.
Full debates are going on in the Commission over Article Nine, but sovereign people are left outside. Don’t allow the legislative body to go exclusively and violently.
多数決での暴挙
衆院憲法審は、テーマとした「オンライン審議」について参考人質疑を含めてわずか４回の議論で憲法56条の「出席」に「オンライン出席も含まれると解釈することができる」というのが「意見の大勢」だとする「取りまとめ」を多数決で採択した。共産だけが反対した。
「結論ありき」の拙速な議論で多数派が憲法解釈をする、また「出席」は本来、議院運営委の所管テーマであり、権限の逸脱だ。こんな暴挙は許されない。
「緊急事態条項」
緊急事態での国会機能維持に関わって「オンライン審議」が先行議論されたが、議論はそのまま緊急事態条項へと雪崩込んだ。先行の議論は「本体議論」への「呼び水」だったか。
緊急事態条項創設は立民（社民含む）と共産以外の会派すべてが主張しているが、その議論は自然災害、感染症はもとより、ロシアのウクライナ侵略に便乗して戦争・武力攻撃事態にまで対処するという議論に及び、「人権の制限」まで堂々と議論されている。
アベ改憲案の緊急事態条項は、自然災害の対処として「議員の任期延長」と「緊急の政令」だけだが、憲法審での議論の土俵は、「自民党改憲草案」（12年）が提起した、いわば「フルセットの緊急事態条項」の議論となっている。
改憲派尖兵の日本維新は、「議員任期の特例」などすぐにでも採決しろと主張している。
９条改憲ありき
憲法審は毎週のように局面が変わる。国民投票法改正案（公選法並び３項目改正）も４月末に強引に審議入りした。改憲派の狙いは、同法附則４条（テレビ・ラジオＣＭやネット広告の規制等）をはじめ抜本的な改正議論を回避して改憲発議の環境は整えたとすることだ。
５月連休明け２回の憲法審は、「安全保障」をテーマに集中議論が行われ、自民は、「主権国家に国防規定がないのは不備だ」と自衛隊を明記する９条改憲を強く主張し、立民は「９条改憲ありきには断固反対する」と表明した。
維新も９条改憲のイメージ案を公表した。憲法審査会でいよいよ９条をめぐって本格的議論がはじまったが、主権者の付託を踏まえない立法府の改憲の暴走は許してはならない。
英訳版↓
No. 1260 Government Enforces to Amend Article Nine
It is eleven years since the Commission on Constitution of the House of Representatives started debates. Today it holds meetings almost every week, infringing its customary rule ‘to proceed arguments on the basis of accords between the ruling and opposition political parties’. The parliament has accelerated debates on revising the constitution since February when the Diet session dealt with budget compilation.
DON’T ALLOW COMMISSION TO GO WITH VIOLENT SPEED
Decision by majority – Is it right?
The Commission on Constitution has adopted lately a decision by majority that the ‘presence’ of members, which is provided by Article 56 of the Constitution, ‘can be interpreted that it includes online participation’. It has held only four meetings to involve in the issue of ‘online attendance’. It insists that the opinion held by majority is the main stream. Solely the Communist Party expressed objection.
The decision-making process was so quick to ‘easily reach the conclusion’: this means the majority of the commission’s total members could interpret the constitution. It is properly the House Steering Committee that is responsible for authorizing the ‘presence’. The commission deviates its jurisdiction. Such reckless behaviors cannot be accepted.
An article on emergency situation
Separately, an issue ‘online Diet sessions’ was discussed earlier: how to maintain Diet function under some emergency. The arguments, however, have swiftly rolled down to debates of an article on exigency. The prior talk has led to ‘the subject’, being as a pump.
Concerning creation of the article on contingency, all political parties and groups in the Diet are in favor, except for the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP), the Social Democratic Party and the Communist Party; the current debates imply counteractions to cope with not only natural disasters and infectious diseases but also wars and armed conflicts, taking advantage of the Russian intrusion to Ukraine. Open discussions are going on in the Diet to restrict the fundamental human rights. According to the text steered by ex-premier Abe on revising the constitution, an article on national emergency provides only measures to tackle natural disasters, including ’extension of the term of lawmakers’ and ‘emergency administrative orders’. Today’s debates in the commission, however, extend to a comprehensive article to meet contingencies, relying on the LDP’S draft to rewrite Constitution (2012).
The Ishin (=Innovation) Party, which is the frontrunner for constitution amendment, asserts an immediate adoption by the Diet of the request of an exceptional term of lawmakers.
Article Nine is the target for alteration
The Commission on Constitution changes phases every week; concerning the bill to change the National Referendum Act (to revise three articles along with the Public Office Election Law), debates began in the Diet coercively late April. Advocates of constitutional amendment are to arrange complete conditions for them to present a proposal for a change, avoiding sincere debates how to rightly modify Article 4, Appendix of the said plebiscite law, which provides restrictions on advertisement by TV, radio and internet.
The commission held two meetings after the May holidays, discussing intensively national security. The LDP representatives say that it is inadequate for a sovereign state to lack an article to defend the nation: it ardently insisted on description of the Self Defense Forces onto Article Nine. Meanwhile, those from the CDP raised stern objection to the stance that rewriting Article Nine should be made prerequisite.
The Ishin Party, too, has issued its draft text to change Article Nine to provide an outline.
Full debates are going on in the Commission over Article Nine, but sovereign people are left outside. Don’t allow the legislative body to go exclusively and violently.
June 1, 2022