No. 1321 Ruling Bloc Agreed on Bringing Emergency Clause in Constitution
Speedy processes are going on today to amend the Constitution of Japan. Parliamentary debates were actively held in the last session in both of the Houses’ panels on the Constitution; the ruling bloc plus two oppositions, namely, the Ishin Party (=Renovation Party) and the Kokumin-Minshu Party (=Democratic Party for the People) as well as the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and the Komeito, have reached an accord in the necessity to extend the term of office of lawmakers in the House of Representatives (Lower House). That means they will revise the Constitution by introducing a national emergency clause. They are ready to present a draft text on the clause in the coming extraordinary session of the Diet.
CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT DRIVES INCREASE SPEED
The recent energetic debates to revise the Constitution are attributable to the eminence of the two political parties resulted in the general elections held in autumn 2021, the Ishin and the Kokumin, which want to amend the Constitution in a hasty manner, and to the retreat of the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP), which has persevered with the adverse drives, keeping a vigilant stance in rewriting the supreme law.
Furthermore, the constitution boards in the parliament suffer from the rule by the majority. The current panels, the Constitution Examination Boards, were previously called the Constitution Study Boards where both of the majority and minority groups could enjoy the same length of time in their discussions. But today the panels’ operation has changed. In the board of the House of Representatives the objection to online debates presented by the Communist Party was ruled out by the majority in March, 2022.
Unleashed steady and speedy processes to amend Constitution
During the ordinary Diet session in 2021 in the House of Representatives the panel had three times of meetings, 16 times in 2022 and this year it did 15 times. The members ardently and frequently discuss an emergency clause and description of the Self Defense Forces in Article Nine. The debates were elaborately managed by pro-revisionists. Steady and speedy moves advance to compile a draft text for amendment.
According to an article of the Yomiuri Shinbun newspaper dated June 25, just after the end of ordinary Diet session, ‘the four parties, or the LDP, the Komei, the Ishin and the Kokumin, have agreed in the Lower House’s panel on the necessity to extend term of office of the lawmakers; they will revise the Constitution so as to introduce an emergency clause that would provide measures to cope with massive disasters. A possibility lies in whether a draft may be texted to be put on agenda in the coming Diet’s extraordinary session in October’.
Starting with a minor revision
Two choices are seen for national emergencies; one is constitution amendment to approve the longer tenure of lawmakers in the House of Representatives, and the other is that the House of Councilors should work duly through its emergency session as is specified in the Constitution. The draft text of the ruling LDP says that when Prime Minister should declare national emergency, the Cabinet should be allowed to issue a decree which has the equal effect as a law. The LDP’s text reflects exactly what the emergency clause entails.
Persistent criticisms arose against the LDP’s draft; ‘it reminds of the Weimar Constitution which led to the path of the Nazis’. The LDP changed its stance, switching to a tactic to prolong lawmakers’ term in order to get ‘understanding’ from some of opposition MPs. It has a plan to begin with a minor change of the constitution instead of a full-spec alteration so as to enjoy consensus more easily.
As for the above-said emergency session of the House of Councilors, which Article 54 of the Constitution prescribes, an obligation is provided that ‘when the House of Representatives is dissolved, there must be a general election of the House of Representatives within forty days from the date of dissolution, and the Diet must be convoked within thirty days from the date of the election’. It means that a government could not remain as the authority unless it represents people’s aspiration
One step towards amendment
Prof. Hasebe Yasuo, Graduate School of Waseda University, saying that Article 54 can be applied after the expiration of the term of office of lawmakers, criticizes that the extension of the tenure of members in the Lower House constitutes ‘thinking upside down because the claim removes the very mission to evade illegitimate authority’.
The creation of an emergency clause (extension of lawmakers’ tenure) which distorts the status of Article 54 represents a first step leading to constitution amendment.
憲法改悪の足音が大きくなった。先の通常国会、衆参の憲法審査会で論議が活発化し、緊急事態条項創設を巡り自公維国４党が議員任期延長の必要性で一致、秋の臨時国会で「条文案」という情勢だ。
改憲論議の活発化は21年秋の総選挙で改憲に前のめり・前向きな維新、国民が伸び、後退した立憲も改憲に慎重とは言え、「論憲」の立場で改憲派に押し切られているためだ。
さらに、憲法審も数の論理が台頭している。憲法審の前身「憲法調査会」からの、小会派も大会派と発言時間に差をつけない運営が様変わりした。昨年３月の衆院憲法審では、オンライン審議を認める見解を共産の反対を押し切って多数決で可決したのだ。
着々とハイペース
そして、21年通常国会では衆院で３回の憲法審が22年16回、今年は15回開かれ、緊急事態条項、９条への自衛隊明記などが改憲派の強引な運営で頻繁に議論、改憲原案作成へ布石が着々とハイペースで打たれている。
通常国会閉会後の６月25日付『読売』は、「衆院憲法審で、大規模災害時などの対応を規定する緊急事態条項創設を巡り、自公維国４党が議員任期を延長する憲法改正の必要性で一致。秋の臨時国会で条文案の作成につなげられるかが焦点」などと報じた。
「マイナー改憲」で
緊急事態を巡っては、衆院議員の任期延長を認める改憲か、参院の緊急集会で対応すべきかが焦点になっている。自民党改憲草案は、首相が宣言すれば内閣が法律と同じ効力をもつ緊急政令を出せる。緊急事態条項の「本流」だ。
だが、草案にはナチスに道を開いたワイマール憲法を想起させると批判が強まり、一部野党の「理解」を得るため議員任期延長に戦略を変えた。改憲の突破口は、フルスペックでなくコンセンサスを得やすいマイナーで開こうというのだ。
緊急事態での参院の緊急集会を定める憲法54 条は、民意を反映しない政権の居座りを許さないために「解散から40日以内の総選挙、総選挙から30日以内の国会召集」を義務付けている。
憲法改悪の一里塚
早稲田大大学院の長谷部恭男教授は、憲法54条は議員任期満了でも適用できるとし、改憲によって緊急時の衆院任期を延長することは「政権の居座りを阻止する目的を没ぼっきゃく却するもので本末転倒」と批判する。
憲法54条の本旨を捻じ曲げた緊急事態条項創設（議員任期延長）は、憲法改悪の一里塚となる。
英訳版↓
No. 1321 Ruling Bloc Agreed on Bringing Emergency Clause in Constitution
Speedy processes are going on today to amend the Constitution of Japan. Parliamentary debates were actively held in the last session in both of the Houses’ panels on the Constitution; the ruling bloc plus two oppositions, namely, the Ishin Party (=Renovation Party) and the Kokumin-Minshu Party (=Democratic Party for the People) as well as the governing Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) and the Komeito, have reached an accord in the necessity to extend the term of office of lawmakers in the House of Representatives (Lower House). That means they will revise the Constitution by introducing a national emergency clause. They are ready to present a draft text on the clause in the coming extraordinary session of the Diet.
CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT DRIVES INCREASE SPEED
The recent energetic debates to revise the Constitution are attributable to the eminence of the two political parties resulted in the general elections held in autumn 2021, the Ishin and the Kokumin, which want to amend the Constitution in a hasty manner, and to the retreat of the Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP), which has persevered with the adverse drives, keeping a vigilant stance in rewriting the supreme law.
Furthermore, the constitution boards in the parliament suffer from the rule by the majority. The current panels, the Constitution Examination Boards, were previously called the Constitution Study Boards where both of the majority and minority groups could enjoy the same length of time in their discussions. But today the panels’ operation has changed. In the board of the House of Representatives the objection to online debates presented by the Communist Party was ruled out by the majority in March, 2022.
Unleashed steady and speedy processes to amend Constitution
During the ordinary Diet session in 2021 in the House of Representatives the panel had three times of meetings, 16 times in 2022 and this year it did 15 times. The members ardently and frequently discuss an emergency clause and description of the Self Defense Forces in Article Nine. The debates were elaborately managed by pro-revisionists. Steady and speedy moves advance to compile a draft text for amendment.
According to an article of the Yomiuri Shinbun newspaper dated June 25, just after the end of ordinary Diet session, ‘the four parties, or the LDP, the Komei, the Ishin and the Kokumin, have agreed in the Lower House’s panel on the necessity to extend term of office of the lawmakers; they will revise the Constitution so as to introduce an emergency clause that would provide measures to cope with massive disasters. A possibility lies in whether a draft may be texted to be put on agenda in the coming Diet’s extraordinary session in October’.
Starting with a minor revision
Two choices are seen for national emergencies; one is constitution amendment to approve the longer tenure of lawmakers in the House of Representatives, and the other is that the House of Councilors should work duly through its emergency session as is specified in the Constitution. The draft text of the ruling LDP says that when Prime Minister should declare national emergency, the Cabinet should be allowed to issue a decree which has the equal effect as a law. The LDP’s text reflects exactly what the emergency clause entails.
Persistent criticisms arose against the LDP’s draft; ‘it reminds of the Weimar Constitution which led to the path of the Nazis’. The LDP changed its stance, switching to a tactic to prolong lawmakers’ term in order to get ‘understanding’ from some of opposition MPs. It has a plan to begin with a minor change of the constitution instead of a full-spec alteration so as to enjoy consensus more easily.
As for the above-said emergency session of the House of Councilors, which Article 54 of the Constitution prescribes, an obligation is provided that ‘when the House of Representatives is dissolved, there must be a general election of the House of Representatives within forty days from the date of dissolution, and the Diet must be convoked within thirty days from the date of the election’. It means that a government could not remain as the authority unless it represents people’s aspiration
One step towards amendment
Prof. Hasebe Yasuo, Graduate School of Waseda University, saying that Article 54 can be applied after the expiration of the term of office of lawmakers, criticizes that the extension of the tenure of members in the Lower House constitutes ‘thinking upside down because the claim removes the very mission to evade illegitimate authority’.
The creation of an emergency clause (extension of lawmakers’ tenure) which distorts the status of Article 54 represents a first step leading to constitution amendment.
September 6, 2023