The Democratic Party (DPJ) of Japan, Japan's new ruling party, has decided to abolish its policy department. In a notice given to its Diet members by Ichiro Ozawa, the party's director general, the DPJ has prohibited its Diet members from directly proposing bills, within the exception of lawmaking regarding highly political issues, such as electoral law. Instead, a new set of policy workshops will be held between the DPJ's parliamentary corps and its ministers, through which the former can express its policy concerns to the latter. The DPJ cabinet members will take these views into account in the process of bill drafting.
The DPJ's fear is that members of parliament will be captured by interest groups if they are able to propose bills by themselves, and that their role should be limited to reviewing and passing the bills proposed by the cabinet. The Japanese Constitution vests the sole legislative power in the Diet but allows the cabinet to propose bills. But the bureaucracy-dominated system formed in prewar constitutional practice took the position that the the power to propose bills falls within the scope of the executive power. Still, even under the LDP regime, parliament-proposed bills played an important role when Diet members decided to break partisan lines to make laws for which the cabinet had no concern. The DPJ's new policy of cabinet centralism may raise questions about the separation of powers in a parliamentary government.
--Tokujin Matsudaira, Hitosubashi University
main content
9.21.2009
Guest Post: Matsudaira on Japan Election
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Categories
- AALS (1)
- abortion (4)
- Afghanistan (2)
- amendment (3)
- Arend Lijphart (1)
- Australia (4)
- Austria (1)
- Belgium (1)
- berkeley (1)
- bilingualism (1)
- bill of rights (2)
- Bolivia (1)
- Bosnia (3)
- budget (1)
- Bulgaria (1)
- C-SPAN (1)
- campaign finance; election (1)
- Canada (9)
- Chile (2)
- China (4)
- Claudia Haupt (4)
- Colombia (1)
- consociational democracy (1)
- constitutional amendment (2)
- constitutional change (11)
- constitutional convention (1)
- constitutional convergence (2)
- constitutional design (6)
- constitutional interpretation (4)
- constitutional law (2)
- Constitutional Monarchy (1)
- constitutional pluralism (1)
- constitutional politics (6)
- constitutional review (2)
- constitutional theory (2)
- constitutionalism (1)
- constitutionalization (2)
- consultation (2)
- coup (1)
- Court of Cassation (1)
- courts (3)
- criminal justice (2)
- Criminal Law (2)
- crucifixes (1)
- culture (1)
- Czech Republic (1)
- Dahlia Lithwick (1)
- Daniel Lansberg-Rodriguez (3)
- David Kennedy (1)
- death penalty (1)
- Democratic Party of Japan (3)
- Denny's (1)
- dignity (1)
- Discretion (1)
- Dominic Nardi (1)
- Dominican Republic (2)
- Donald Clarke (1)
- Economist (1)
- education (2)
- Egypt (1)
- election (7)
- electoral malapportionment (2)
- emergency powers (1)
- empirical legal studies (1)
- enemy combatants (1)
- environment (1)
- equality rights (2)
- ethics (1)
- ethnic discrimination (1)
- European Convention on Human Rights (6)
- European Court of Human Rights (5)
- European Court of Justice (2)
- European Union (2)
- extradition (1)
- federalism (3)
- filibuster (2)
- film (1)
- Fiona De Londras (1)
- gay marriage (1)
- gay rights (5)
- Georgia (1)
- Germany (5)
- global administrative law (1)
- Greece (1)
- Guantanamo Bay (2)
- guns (1)
- Herzegovina (1)
- honduras (7)
- hp (197)
- HP; constitutional design (1)
- hp; Tom Ginsburg (3)
- inaugural post (1)
- India (5)
- information (1)
- interamerican democratic charter (1)
- international law (2)
- Iran (1)
- iraq (8)
- Ireland (2)
- Israel (8)
- Italy (2)
- Japan (11)
- Jeffrey Dunoff (1)
- Job postings (1)
- Joel Trachtman (1)
- judicial appointments (7)
- judicial elections (4)
- judicialization (4)
- jury system (2)
- Kenpo (1)
- Kenya (11)
- Kohei Nasu (2)
- kuwait (1)
- Kyrgyzstan (2)
- Labor rights (2)
- language (1)
- Language rights (2)
- Latin America (19)
- Law and Society Association; (1)
- Liberal Democratic Party (2)
- local government law (1)
- Lorenzo Zucca (1)
- Macedonia (1)
- Malaysia (1)
- Mark Kende (1)
- Mark Kende (13)
- Mark Kende hp (7)
- methodology (1)
- Mexico (3)
- Miguel Schor (2)
- minarets (1)
- MPSA (1)
- Muslims (1)
- Myanmar (1)
- Nepal (1)
- Nicaragua (1)
- niger (3)
- Norio Wakui (2)
- North Korea (1)
- Omar Khadr (1)
- Organization of American States (1)
- Pakistan (4)
- Palestine (1)
- parakeet (1)
- Philippines (2)
- privatization (1)
- process (3)
- Proposition 8 (1)
- Queen (1)
- ratification (2)
- referenda (1)
- religion (6)
- religious discrimination (1)
- reports (2)
- research (1)
- retirement (1)
- Richard Albert (16)
- right to die (1)
- right to food (1)
- Romania (1)
- rule by law (1)
- ruling the world (1)
- saiban-in seido (1)
- scholarship (1)
- secularism (1)
- senate (1)
- Senate of Canada (1)
- Sentencing (1)
- socioeconomic rights (1)
- Somalia (2)
- south africa (1)
- South Korea (1)
- Spain (1)
- state constitutions (2)
- Stephen Harper (2)
- Sudan (2)
- summer law programs (1)
- Supreme Constitutional Court of Egypt (1)
- Supreme Court justices (1)
- Supreme Court of Canada (5)
- Supreme Court of Japan (3)
- Supreme Court of the United States (2)
- Suzanna Kingston (1)
- Sweden (1)
- Switzerland (1)
- Sylvio Berlusconi (1)
- Taiwan (2)
- Tamir Moustafa (1)
- term limits (15)
- Terrorism; Guantanamo Bay (1)
- Thailand (1)
- Togo (1)
- Tokuji Izumi (3)
- Tokujin Matsudaira (1)
- Tonga (1)
- torture (1)
- transitional justice (2)
- Turkey (4)
- United Kingdom (5)
- united nations (1)
- United States (5)
- venezuela (1)
- Victor Ferreres Comella (1)
- Zimbabwe (1)
Archives
-
►
2010
(120)
-
►
August
(10)
- Iraqi constitutional failure and external enforcem...
- An Unconstitutional Constitutional Amendment?
- A Culture of Impunity in Niger?
- A constitutional right to food for India?
- Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina dis...
- A Canadian at Guantanamo Bay
- Proportionality and Justice Breyer's New Book
- Kenya says yes
- California's gay marriage ban struck down as uncon...
- Looking like "yes" in Kenya
-
►
July
(14)
- The unstable presidentialization of Japan's parlia...
- Georgian President seeks new draft
- “… far more onerous than the restrictions found in...
- Constitution-making in Somalia
- Veiled Equality and Secularism.
- Argentina Legalizes Gay Marriage
- The Law and the Social Reality of Other Constituti...
- Political Parties and Comparative Constitutional L...
- Important Decision from European Court of Human Ri...
- Televising Supreme Court nomination hearings
- Serving up Constitutional Kaldreta in the Philippi...
- Free Exercise and State Establishment Redux
- Summer Travel and Comparative Constitutional Law
- Extraterritorial application of European human rig...
-
►
June
(11)
- German Right to Die Case and Supreme Court Confirm...
- and Kyrgyz Republic passes the Constitution
- Embattled Government of Kyrgyzstan seeks referendu...
- A Supreme Court vs. Religious Authorities Showdown...
- More Soccer and Comparative Constitutionalism
- World Cup and U.S. Supreme Court Nominations
- The Legal Status of the Queen in Canada
- Enacting Constitutionalism
- Political (and constitutional) Turmoil in Belgium
- Xenophobia in South Africa and the U.S.
- Abortion foes battle Kenya draft
-
►
May
(9)
- German President Resigns
- Dominic Nardi on Pakistan's Judiciary: Suo Moto Ta...
- Greece, the Euro, and the FCC
- 2010 Annual Meeting of the Law & Society Associati...
- Wiki-constitutionalism?
- Kagan Confirmation Controversy?
- US Supreme Court debate to heat up again
- New Socio-Economic Rights Book
- Rights at Work?
-
►
August
(10)
-
▼
2009
(111)
-
▼
September
(15)
- Egypt's New Chief Justice
- North Korea's Cryptic Reforms
- Constitutional Change in the Dominican Republic
- The Spanish Constitutional Court faces direct demo...
- New Report on Transitional Justice
- Guest Post: Matsudaira on Japan Election
- Why constitutional theory needs to be comparative ...
- Job posting: Somalia
- Guest Post on Constitutionalism in China: A Respo...
- Whither Chinese Constitutionalism in the 21st Cent...
- The Japanese Election: Much Ado About Very Little?...
- State Constitutionalism and the Comparative Projec...
- Dignity, Death & the Depth of Comparative Engageme...
- Quiet ending (for now) to the debate over judicial...
- Once Pinochet's Censor, Now President of the Const...
-
▼
September
(15)
Our partners:
Home |
About |
Repository | Reports |
Blog |
Resources |
Contact
XHTML | CSS |
Section 508
Copyright ConstitutionMaking.ORG: Resources for Constitutional Design 2008-2010. | Site by Soul Identity

4 comments:
This seems like a sensible strategy for the DPJ: early on they need to establish strong party discipline to maintain their coalition and to stand down the bureaucracy, which is their stated immediate goal. But the risk is that the cabinet will lack sufficient information to tackle important policy problems. If you antagonize the bureacracy, and do not incentivise the legislature to provide policy ideas, where do the ideas come from, and on what information are they based?
Thanks for the comment. DPJ has made it clear that the policy making in each of ministries will be conducted by the Minister (1), Vice Minister (1-2) and parliamentary secretary (2), all of them are members of the Diet. But, as you point out, each team is too small to replace tradtional bureaucratic policy making. So far the new ministers still rely on the DPJ's staff to advice them. For DPJ government, it will take months to pass new statutes creating more jobs for political appointee.
The new government also has banned high rank bureaucrats from holding press conference-under LDP's "ancien regime" administrative heads of ministries forced their bosses to accept their policy by holding press conference or "leaking" to the press. The DPJ government's policy has offended the reporters of mainstream media, who were also beneficiaries and allies of ancien regime, protesting that DPJ's new policy violates freedom of the press.
Japan has been a state of bureaucracy since the Meiji era, and bureaucrats have seized the power to propose bills, make rules and policies for a hundred years. I don't think they will just accept their failure and go back to work as "public employee".
"The DPJ has prohibited its Diet members from directly proposing bills"
In the Commonwealth and Ireland this is called a 'Private Member's Bill'. Only a tiny number ever become law, and then only with government support. So I think even if they were abolished it would make a negligible difference.
Is this kind of bill more important in Japan?
Yes. It was important under the LDP regime, especially after the 1980s.
Post a Comment