Home  ›  How Should a New Family Be With a New Constitution After Ww2 in Japan

How Should a New Family Be With a New Constitution After Ww2 in Japan

Written By Sunday, March 6, 2022 Add Comment Edit

Principles, institutions and law of political governance in Japan

Constitution of Nippon
Nihon Kenpo01.jpg

Preamble of the Constitution
Overview
Original title 日本国憲法
Jurisdiction Japan
Engagement constructive 3 May 1947
System Unitary parliamentary
de facto [1] constitutional monarchy
Government structure
Branches Three
Head of land Not defined in constitution.[2] The Emperor is "the symbol of the Land and of the unity of the people", only carries many functions of a caput of state.[1]
Chambers Bicameral (National Nutrition: House of Representatives, House of Councillors)
Executive Cabinet, headed by the Prime number Minister
Judiciary Supreme Court
Federalism Unitary
Electoral college No
History
Start legislature xx April 1947 (HC)
25 April 1947 (HR)
Start executive 24 May 1947
First court iv August 1947
Amendments 0[3]
Location National Archives of Japan
Author(south) Centrolineal GHQ and members of the Royal Diet
Signatories Emperor Shōwa
Supersedes Meiji Constitution
Full text
Constitution of Japan at Wikisource

The Constitution of Japan (Shinjitai: 日本国憲法 , Kyūjitai: 日本國憲󠄁法 , Hepburn: Nippon-koku kenpō ) is the constitution of Japan and the supreme law in the state. Written primarily by American civilian officials working under the Centrolineal Occupation of Nihon, the constitution replaced the Meiji Constitution of 1890 when it came into upshot on three May 1947.

The constitution provides for a parliamentary system of government and guarantees certain fundamental rights. In contrast to the Meiji Constitution, which invested the Emperor of Japan with supreme political power, under the new lease the Emperor was reduced to "the symbol of the Land and of the unity of the people" and exercises only a ceremonial role acting nether the sovereignty of the people.[4]

The constitution, also known equally the "Mail service-state of war Constitution" ( 戦後憲法 , Sengo-Kenpō ) or the "Peace Constitution" ( 平和憲法 , Heiwa-Kenpō ),[v] was drafted under the supervision of Douglas MacArthur, the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, during the Allied occupation of Japan after World War Ii. Japanese scholars reviewed and modified it before adoption.[7] It changed Japan's previous system of disciplinarian semi-ramble monarchy and stratocracy with a parliamentary monarchy. The Constitution is best known for Article 9, by which Japan renounces its right to wage state of war and maintain military forces.[8]

The Japanese constitution is the oldest unamended constitution in the earth. Information technology has not had any amendments to its text in more than 70 years. It is a brusque constitution with only v,000 words, compared to the average constitution with 21,000 words.[3] [9]

Historical origins [edit]

Meiji Constitution [edit]

The Meiji Constitution was the central law of the Empire of Japan, propagated during the reign of Emperor Meiji ( r. 1867–1912). Information technology provided for a form of mixed constitutional and absolute monarchy, based on the Prussian and British models. In theory, the Emperor of Japan was the supreme leader, and the cabinet, whose prime minister was elected past a privy quango, were his followers; in practice, the Emperor was caput of state just the Prime Minister was the bodily head of government. Under the Meiji Constitution, the prime minister and his cabinet were non necessarily called from the elected members of the Diet.

The Potsdam Proclamation [edit]

On 26 July 1945, shortly before the end of the 2d World War, Allied leaders of the United States, the Uk, and the Republic of Mainland china issued the Potsdam Declaration. The Declaration demanded Japan's unconditional surrender, demilitarisation and democratisation.[10]

The declaration defined the major goals of the postal service-surrender Allied occupation: "The Japanese government shall remove all obstacles to the revival and strengthening of democratic tendencies amid the Japanese people. Liberty of speech, of religion, and of thought, also as respect for the fundamental human rights shall be established" (Section 10). In addition, "The occupying forces of the Allies shall exist withdrawn from Japan as soon as these objectives have been achieved and there has been established in accordance with the freely expressed will of the Japanese people a peacefully inclined and responsible government" (Section 12). The Allies sought not merely punishment or reparations from a militaristic foe, just fundamental changes in the nature of its political arrangement. In the words of political scientist Robert E. Ward: "The occupation was perhaps the single most exhaustively planned operation of massive and externally directed political change in world history."

The Japanese government accepted the weather condition of the Potsdam Declaration, which necessitates amendments to its Constitution after the surrender.[10]

Drafting procedure [edit]

The constitution of Japan was largely drafted by United states of america lawyers in the occupation authority. This epitome is of a secret memo written by members of the authority on the subject field of the new constitution.

The wording of the Potsdam Declaration—"The Japanese Regime shall remove all obstacles ..."—and the initial post-surrender measures taken by MacArthur, suggest that neither he nor his superiors in Washington intended to impose a new political system on Nippon unilaterally. Instead, they wished to encourage Japan'due south new leaders to initiate democratic reforms on their own. But by early 1946, MacArthur'south staff and Japanese officials were at odds over the most key event, the writing of a new Constitution. Emperor Hirohito, Prime number Minister Kijūrō Shidehara and nigh of the cabinet members were extremely reluctant to take the drastic step of replacing the 1889 Meiji Constitution with a more liberal certificate.[11]

In late 1945, Shidehara appointed Jōji Matsumoto, state minister without portfolio, head of a blue-ribbon commission of Constitutional scholars to suggest revisions. The Matsumoto Commission's recommendations (ja:松本試案), made public in February 1946, were quite bourgeois as "no more than than a touching-up of the Meiji Constitution".[ citation needed ] MacArthur rejected them outright and ordered his staff to typhoon a completely new document. An additional reason for this was that on 24 January 1946, Prime number Minister Shidehara had suggested to MacArthur that the new Constitution should contain an article renouncing war.

The Constitution was mostly drafted by American authors.[6] A few Japanese scholars reviewed and modified information technology.[vii] Much of the drafting was done by 2 senior army officers with constabulary degrees: Milo Rowell and Courtney Whitney, although others chosen past MacArthur had a big say in the document. The articles most equality between men and women were written by Beate Sirota.[12] [13]

Although the document'southward authors were American, they took into business relationship the Meiji Constitution, the demands of Japanese lawyers, the opinions of pacifist political leaders such every bit Shidehara and Shigeru Yoshida, and specially the draft Kenpō Sōan Yōkō ( 憲法草案要綱 ), which guaranteed fundamental rights based on popular sovereignty.[14] It was presented by the Constitution Enquiry Clan ( 憲法研究会 , Kenpō Kenkyū-kai ) nether the chairmanship of Suzuki Yasuzō ( 鈴木安蔵 ) (1904–1983), which had been translated into English in its entirety already by the end of December 1945. MacArthur gave the authors less than a week to complete the draft, which was presented to surprised Japanese officials on 13 February 1946. On 6 March 1946, the regime publicly disclosed an outline of the pending Constitution. On 10 Apr, elections were held for the House of Representatives of the Ninetieth Regal Diet, which would consider the proposed Constitution. The election constabulary having been changed, this was the offset general ballot in Japan in which women were permitted to vote.

Unlike most previous Japanese legal documents, the constitution is written in modern colloquial Japanese instead of Classical Japanese.[15] The Japanese version includes some bad-mannered phrasing and scholars sometimes consult the English drafts to resolve ambiguities.[sixteen] [17]

The MacArthur draft, which proposed a unicameral legislature, was changed at the insistence of the Japanese to let a bicameral 1, with both houses being elected. In most other important respects, the government adopted the ideas embodied in the 13 February certificate in its own draft proposal of 6 March. These included the constitution's most distinctive features: the symbolic role of the Emperor, the prominence of guarantees of civil and human rights, and the renunciation of state of war. The constitution followed closely a 'model copy' prepared by MacArthur's command.[eighteen]

In 1946, criticism of or reference to MacArthur'due south role in drafting the constitution could be fabricated discipline to Civil Censorship Disengagement (CCD) censorship (as was any reference to censorship itself).[19] Until tardily 1947, CCD exerted pre-publication censorship over about 70 daily newspapers, all books and magazines and many other publications.[20]

Adoption [edit]

The Preamble to the Constitution

The Imperial Signature (upper right) and Seal

It was decided that in adopting the new document the Meiji Constitution would not be violated. Rather, to maintain legal continuity, the new Constitution was adopted as an amendment to the Meiji Constitution in accordance with the provisions of Article 73 of that document. Nether Article 73 the new constitution was formally submitted to the Imperial Diet, which was elected by universal suffrage, which was granted as well women, in 1946, by the Emperor through an imperial rescript issued on 20 June. The typhoon constitution was submitted and deliberated upon as the Bill for Revision of the Royal Constitution.

The old constitution required that the bill receive the back up of a two-thirds bulk in both houses of the Nutrition to become law. Both chambers had made amendments. Without interference by MacArthur, House of Representatives added Commodity 17, which guarantees the correct to sue the State for tort of officials, Article forty, which guarantees the right to sue the State for wrongful detention, and Article 25, which guarantees the correct to life.[21] [22] The house also amended Article nine. And the House of Peers canonical the document on 6 Oct; the House of Representatives adopted it in the same course the following 24-hour interval, with but five members voting against. Information technology became police when it received the Emperor's assent on 3 Nov 1946.[23] Under its ain terms, the constitution came into effect on three May 1947.

A government arrangement, the Kenpō Fukyū Kai ("Constitution Popularisation Society"), was established to promote the acceptance of the new constitution among the populace.[24]

Early proposals for amendment [edit]

The new constitution would non accept been written the way it was had MacArthur and his staff allowed Japanese politicians and ramble experts to resolve the consequence as they wished.[ citation needed ] The document's strange origins have, understandably, been a focus of controversy since Nihon recovered its sovereignty in 1952.[ citation needed ] Nevertheless in late 1945 and 1946, there was much public discussion on constitutional reform, and the MacArthur draft was plainly greatly influenced past the ideas of certain Japanese liberals. The MacArthur draft did non try to impose a U.s.-manner presidential or federal organisation. Instead, the proposed constitution conformed to the British model of parliamentary government, which was seen by the liberals equally the well-nigh viable alternative to the European absolutism of the Meiji Constitution.[ citation needed ]

After 1952, conservatives and nationalists attempted to revise the constitution to brand it more than "Japanese", just these attempts were frustrated for a number of reasons. One was the extreme difficulty of alteration information technology. Amendments require approval by two-thirds of the members of both houses of the National Diet before they can exist presented to the people in a referendum (Article 96). Also, opposition parties, occupying more than i-third of the Nutrition seats, were firm supporters of the constitutional condition quo. Even for members of the ruling Liberal Democratic Political party (LDP), the constitution was advantageous. They had been able to style a policy-making procedure congenial to their interests within its framework. Yasuhiro Nakasone, a strong abet of constitutional revision during much of his political career, for example, downplayed the effect while serving as prime minister between 1982 and 1987.

Provisions [edit]

The constitution has a length of approximately v,000 words and consists of a preamble and 103 articles grouped into 11 chapters. These are:

  • I. The Emperor (Articles ane–8)
  • II. Renunciation of State of war (Article nine)
  • III. Rights and Duties of the People (Articles 10–twoscore)
  • 4. The Diet (Articles 41–64)
  • V. The Chiffonier (Articles 65–75)
  • Half-dozen. Judiciary (Manufactures 76–82)
  • 7. Finance (Articles 83–91)
  • Eight. Local Self–Government (Manufactures 92–95)
  • 9. Amendments (Article 96)
  • X. Supreme Law (Articles 97–99)
  • XI. Supplementary Provisions (Articles 100–103)

Edict [edit]

The Constitution of Japan signed past Emperor Showa and Ministers of Country

The constitution starts with an royal edict made by the Emperor. Information technology contains the Emperor's Privy Seal and signature, and is countersigned by the Prime number Minister and other Ministers of State as required past the previous constitution of the Empire of Japan. The edict states:

I rejoice that the foundation for the construction of a new Nippon has been laid according to the will of the Japanese people, and hereby sanction and promulgate the amendments of the Imperial Japanese Constitution effected following the consultation with the Privy Council and the decision of the Majestic Nutrition made in accordance with Commodity 73 of the said Constitution.[23] [25]

Preamble [edit]

The constitution contains a firm declaration of the principle of popular sovereignty in the preamble. This is proclaimed in the proper name of the "Japanese people" and declares that "sovereign power resides with the people" and that:

Government is a sacred trust of the people, the potency for which is derived from the people, the powers of which are exercised by the representatives of the people, and the benefits of which are enjoyed past the people.

Office of the purpose of this linguistic communication is to refute the previous constitutional theory that sovereignty resided in the Emperor. The constitution asserts that the Emperor is only a symbol of the state, and that he derives "his position from the will of the people with whom resides sovereign power" (Article 1). The text of the constitution also asserts the liberal doctrine of fundamental human rights. In detail Article 97 states that:

the cardinal human rights by this constitution guaranteed to the people of Nihon are fruits of the age-old struggle of human to be gratuitous; they accept survived the many exacting tests for durability and are conferred upon this and futurity generations in trust, to exist held for all time inviolate.

The Emperor (Manufactures ane–viii) [edit]

Under the constitution, the Emperor is "the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people". Sovereignty rests with the people, not the Emperor as information technology did under the Meiji Constitution.[10] The Emperor carries out nigh functions of a caput of state, formally appointing the Prime Government minister and Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, convoking the National Diet and dissolving the Firm of Representatives, and as well promulgating statutes and treaties and exercising other enumerated functions. However, he acts under the communication and blessing of the Cabinet or the Diet.[10]

In contrast with the Meiji Constitution, the Emperor's office is entirely ceremonial, as he does not have powers related to government. Unlike other constitutional monarchies, he is non even the nominal principal executive or even the nominal commander-in-master of the Japan Cocky-Defense Forces (JSDF). The constitution explicitly limits the Emperor's office to matters of state delineated in the constitution. The constitution also states that these duties can exist delegated by the Emperor every bit provided for by law.

Succession to the Chrysanthemum Throne is regulated by the Imperial Household Law and is managed by a ten-member body chosen the Purple Household Council. The budget for the maintenance of the Imperial House is managed by resolutions of the Diet.

Renunciation of war (Article 9) [edit]

Under Article ix, the "Japanese people forever renounce state of war as a sovereign right of the nation and the threat or use of forcefulness as means of settling international disputes". To this end the commodity provides that "land, body of water, and air forces, as well equally other state of war potential, will never be maintained". The necessity and practical extent of Article nine has been debated in Japan since its enactment, peculiarly following the institution of the Nihon Self-Defence Forces (JSDF), a de facto postal service-war Japanese military force that substitutes for the pre-war Military, since 1 July 1954. Some lower courts have found the JSDF unconstitutional, simply the Supreme Court never ruled on this issue.[10]

Individuals accept also challenged the presence of U.S. forces in Japan as well as the U.South.-Japan Security Treaty under Article ix of the Constitution.[26] The Supreme Court of Nippon has found that the stationing of U.S. forces did not violate Article 9, because it did not involve forces nether Japanese control.[26] The Court ruled that the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty to be a highly sensitive political question, and declined to rule on its legality under the political question doctrine.[26]

Diverse political groups accept chosen for either revising or abolishing the restrictions of Article ix to permit collective defence efforts and strengthen Japan's armed forces capabilities.

The United states has pressured Japan to improve Article 9 and to rearm[27] [28] as early as 1948[29] with Nippon gradually expanding its armed forces capabilities, "sidestepping constitutional constraints".[30]

Individual rights (Articles 10–forty) [edit]

"The rights and duties of the people" are featured prominently in the post-war constitution. 30-one of its 103 articles are devoted to describing them in detail, reflecting the commitment to "respect for the fundamental homo rights" of the Potsdam Declaration. Although the Meiji Constitution had a section devoted to the "rights and duties of subjects" which guaranteed "liberty of speech, writing, publication, public meetings, and associations", these rights were granted "within the limits of law" and could exist limited by legislation.[ten] Freedom of religious belief was allowed "insofar as information technology does not interfere with the duties of subjects" (all Japanese were required to admit the Emperor's divinity, and those, such as Christians, who refused to do and so out of religious conviction were accused of lèse-majesté). Such freedoms are delineated in the mail service-war constitution without qualification.

Individual rights nether the Japanese constitution are rooted in Article 13 where the constitution asserts the right of the people "to exist respected as individuals" and, subject to "the public welfare", to "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". This article's core notion is jinkaku, which represents "the elements of character and personality that come together to ascertain each person as an private", and which represents the aspects of each individual's life that the government is obligated to respect in the exercise of its power.[31] Article 13 has been used equally the footing to institute ramble rights to privacy, self-conclusion and the control of an individual's own prototype, rights which are not explicitly stated in the constitution.

Subsequent provisions provide for:

  • Equality before the law: The constitution guarantees equality before the law and outlaws discrimination against Japanese citizens based on "political, economic or social relations" or "race, creed, sex, social condition or family origin" (Article xiv). The right to vote cannot be denied on the grounds of "race, creed, sexual activity, social status, family unit origin, education, property or income" (Commodity 44). Equality between the sexes is explicitly guaranteed in relation to marriage (Commodity 24) and childhood education (Article 26).
  • Prohibition of peerage: Article 14 forbids the country from recognising peerage. Honours may be conferred but they must non be hereditary or grant special privileges.
  • Democratic elections: Article 15 provides that "the people accept the inalienable correct to choose their public officials and to dismiss them". It guarantees universal adult (in Japan, persons age 20 and older) suffrage and the undercover ballot.
  • Prohibition of slavery: Guaranteed by Article eighteen. Involuntary servitude is permitted only as penalization for a crime.
  • Separation of Religion and State: The country is prohibited from granting privileges or political authority to a religion, or conducting religious educational activity (Commodity 20).
  • Liberty of assembly, association, speech, and secrecy of communications: All guaranteed without qualification by Article 21, which forbids censorship.
  • Workers' rights: Work is declared both a right and obligation past Article 27 which also states that "standards for wages, hours, rest and other working conditions shall be fixed by law" and that children shall not be exploited. Workers accept the right to participate in a merchandise spousal relationship (Article 28).
  • Right to property: Guaranteed subject to the "public welfare". The state may have property for public use if it pays merely compensation (Article 29). The country also has the correct to levy taxes (Article thirty).
  • Correct to due process: Article 31 provides that no one may be punished "except according to procedure established by police force". Article 32, which provides that "No person shall be denied the correct of access to the courts", originally drafted to recognize criminal due process rights, is now also understood as the source of due procedure rights for civil and administrative law cases.[32]
  • Protection against unlawful detention: Commodity 33 provides that no one may exist apprehended without an arrest warrant, salvage where caught in flagrante delicto. Commodity 34 guarantees habeas corpus, right to counsel, and correct to exist informed of charges. Article 40 enshrines the right to sue the state for wrongful detention.
  • Right to a fair trial: Article 37 guarantees the correct to a public trial earlier an impartial tribunal with counsel for ane's defense force and compulsory access to witnesses.
  • Protection confronting cocky-incrimination: Article 38 provides that no one may exist compelled to testify against themselves, that confessions obtained under duress are not open-door and that no one may be convicted solely on the basis of their own confession.
  • Other guarantees:
    • Right to petition government (Article 16)
    • Right to sue the state (Article 17)
    • Freedom of thought and conscience (Commodity xix)
    • Freedom of expression (Article 19)
    • Freedom of faith (Article 20)
    • Rights to alter residence, cull employment, move abroad and relinquish nationality (Article 22)
    • Academic freedom (Article 23)
    • Prohibition of forced marriage (Article 24)
    • Compulsory pedagogy (Article 26)
    • Protection against entries, search and seizures (Article 35)
    • Prohibition of torture and savage punishments (Article 36)
    • Prohibition of ex post facto laws (Commodity 39)
    • Prohibition of double jeopardy (Article 39)

Under Japanese case police force, constitutional human rights apply to corporations to the extent possible given their corporate nature. Ramble homo rights also utilise to strange nationals to the extent that such rights are not by their nature only applicative to citizens (for example, foreigners accept no right to enter Nippon under Article 22 and no right to vote under Article 15, and their other political rights may exist restricted to the extent that they interfere with the country's conclusion making).

Organs of authorities (Articles 41–95) [edit]

Politics under the Post-war Constitution

The constitution establishes a parliamentary organization of government in which legislative authority is vested in a bicameral National Diet. Although a bicameral Nutrition existed nether the existing constitution, the new constitution abolished the upper House of Peers, which consisted of members of the nobility (similar to the British House of Lords). The new constitution provides that both chambers be directly elected, with a lower House of Representatives and an upper House of Councillors.

The Diet nominates the Prime Government minister from amid its members, although the Lower House has the final potency if the two Houses disagree.[10] Thus, in practice, the Prime Government minister is the leader of the majority political party of the Lower Firm.[10] The House of Representatives has the sole ability to pass a vote of no confidence in the Chiffonier, tin override the House of Councillors' veto on any bill, and has priority in determining the national budget, and blessing treaties.

Executive authority is vested in a cabinet, jointly responsible to the Diet, and headed by a Prime Minister.[10] The prime number minister and a majority of the cabinet members must be members of the Diet, and have the right and obligation to nourish sessions of the Diet. The Cabinet may likewise advise the Emperor to dissolve the Business firm of Representatives and phone call for a general election to exist held.

The judiciary consists of several lower courts headed past a Supreme Court. The Master Justice of the Supreme Courtroom is nominated past the Chiffonier and appointed by the Emperor, while other justices are nominated and appointed by the Chiffonier and attested by the Emperor. Lower courtroom judges are nominated past the Supreme Court, appointed past the Cabinet and attested by the Emperor. All courts have the power of judicial review and may interpret the constitution to overrule statutes and other government acts, just only in the issue that such interpretation is relevant to an bodily dispute.

The constitution also provides a framework for local government, requiring that local entities have elected heads and assemblies, and providing that government acts applicable to particular local areas must exist approved by the residents of those areas. These provisions formed the framework of the Local Autonomy Police force of 1947, which established the modern arrangement of prefectures, municipalities and other local government entities.

Amendments (Article 96) [edit]

Under Commodity 96, amendments to the constitution "shall be initiated past the Diet, through a concurring vote of two-thirds or more than of all the members of each House and shall thereupon be submitted to the people for ratification, which shall require the affirmative vote of a bulk of all votes bandage thereon, at a special referendum or at such election as the Diet shall specify". The constitution has not been amended since its implementation in 1947, although there have been movements led by the Liberal Democratic Party to brand various amendments to information technology.

Other provisions (Articles 97–103) [edit]

Article 97 provides for the inviolability of fundamental human rights. Article 98 provides that the constitution takes precedence over any "law, ordinance, majestic rescript or other act of government" that offends against its provisions, and that "the treaties concluded by Japan and established laws of nations shall exist faithfully observed". In near nations it is for the legislature to determine to what extent, if at all, treaties concluded past the country will exist reflected in its domestic law; nether Article 98, however, international law and the treaties Nippon has ratified automatically class a role of domestic law. Article 99 binds the Emperor and public officials to observe the constitution.

The final four articles gear up forth a six-month transitional menses between adoption and implementation of the Constitution. This transitional period took place from 3 November 1946, to 3 May 1947. Pursuant to Commodity 100, the first Firm of Councillors election was held during this flow in Apr 1947, and pursuant to Article 102, half of the elected Councillors were given three-year terms. A full general election was too held during this period, equally a result of which several former Business firm of Peers members moved to the House of Representatives. Article 103 provided that public officials currently in part would not be removed as a directly consequence of the adoption or implementation of the new Constitution.

Amendments and revisions [edit]

Process [edit]

Article 96 provides that amendments can be made to the Constitution if approved past super majority of two-thirds of both houses of the Diet, and then by a elementary bulk in a popular referendum. The Emperor promulgates the successful amendment in the proper name of the people, and cannot veto information technology. Details of the process is determined by the Diet Deed [ja] [33] and the Human action on Procedures for Amendment of the Constitution of Japan [ja].[34] [35]

Unlike some constitutions (e.g. the German, Italian, and French Constitutions), Japan'southward Constitution does non have an explicit entrenchment provision limiting what can be amended.[ten] However, the Preamble of the Constitution declared commonwealth to be the "universal principle of mankind" and Article 97 proclaims the cardinal rights guaranteed by the Constitution to be "for all time inviolable."[10] Considering of this, scholars more often than not believe that basic principles such every bit the sovereignty of the people, pacifism, and respect for human being rights are unamendable.[ten] [36] More broadly, fundamental norms written in the Constitution by constituent power cannot be amended. The preamble of the Constitution states: "Nosotros reject and revoke all constitutions, laws, ordinances, and rescripts in disharmonize herewith". Pacifism, popular sovereignty and respect for basic human rights are amid them according to the Preamble and Article 11.[37]

History [edit]

The Constitution has not been amended since its enactment in 1946.[10] Some commentators have suggested that the Constitution's American authors favoured the difficulty of the subpoena procedure from a desire that the fundamentals of the regime they had imposed would be resistant to modify.[ citation needed ] Amid the Japanese themselves, whatever alter to the document and to the post-war settlement it embodies is highly controversial. From the 1960s to the 1980s, Constitutional revision was rarely debated,[38] although subpoena of the Constitution has been one of the party line of the LDP since it was formed.[39] [twoscore] [41] In the 1990s, right-leaning and conservative voices broke some taboos,[38] for example, when the newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun published a proffer for Constitutional revision in 1994.[38] This menses saw a number of right-leaning groups pushing aggressively for Constitutional revision and a significant number of organizations and individuals speaking out against revision[42] and in back up of "the peace Constitution".

The debate has been highly polarised. The nigh controversial issues are proposed changes to Article 9—the "peace article"—and provisions relating to the role of the Emperor. Progressive, left, centre-left and peace movement-related individuals and organizations, besides every bit the opposition parties,[43] labor[44] and youth groups abet keeping or strengthening the existing Constitution in these areas, while correct-leaning, nationalist and conservative groups and individuals abet changes to increment the prestige of the Emperor (though not granting him political powers) and to allow a more aggressive stance of the JSDF by turning information technology officially into a military. Other areas of the Constitution and connected laws discussed for potential revision related to the status of women, the didactics system and the system of public corporations (including social welfare, non-turn a profit and religious organizations as well every bit foundations), and structural reform of the election process, e.g. to allow for straight election of the prime minister.[38] Numerous grassroots groups, associations, NGOs, think tanks, scholars, and politicians speak out on either side of the issue.[45]

Amendment Drafts by the LDP [edit]

The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), one of the most influential political parties in Japan that has been in majority in the Diet for almost of the time since its 1955 establishment, has adopted several party platforms each of which lists "revision of the current constitution" as a political motive. One of the earliest platforms, "The Duties of the Party" in 1955, points out equally follows:[46]

Although republic and liberalism emphasized under the control of the Allied occupation should be respected and upheld as a new principle for Japan, the initial objective of the occupying forces of the Allies was mainly to demoralize the State; therefore, many of the reforms implemented by the forces including those of the constitution, instruction and other governmental systems have been unjustly suppressing the notion of the Country and patriotism of the people and excessively disuniting the national sovereignty.

In recent years the LDP has committed itself more to constitutional revision, post-obit its victory in the September 2005 general election of the representatives. Currently, the party has released 2 versions of amendment drafts, i in 2005 and another in 2012.

2005 Draft [edit]

In Baronial 2005, the then Japanese Prime Minister, Jun'ichirō Koizumi, proposed an amendment to the constitution to increase Japan'southward Defence force Forces' roles in international diplomacy. A draft of the proposed constitution was released by the LDP on 22 November 2005 every bit role of the fiftieth ceremony of the party'south founding. The proposed changes included:

  • New wording for the Preamble.
  • First paragraph of Article 9, renouncing war, is retained. The second paragraph, forbidding the maintenance of "land, sea, and air forces, as well as other state of war potential" is replaced past an Article ix-2 which permits a "defence force", nether control of the Prime Minister, to defend the nation and which may participate in international activities. This new section uses the term "軍" (gun, "army" or "military"), which has been avoided in the current constitution. Information technology also adds an Article 76 about armed services courts; members of the JSDF are currently tried every bit civilians past civilian courts.
  • Modified wording in Article 13, regarding respect for private rights.
  • Changes in Commodity 20, which gives the country express permission inside "the telescopic of socially acceptable protocol" for "ethno-cultural practices". Changes Commodity 89 to permit corresponding country funding of religious institutions.
  • Changes to Manufactures 92 and 95, apropos local self-government and relations betwixt local and national governments.
  • Changes to Article 96, reducing the vote requirement for ramble amendments in the Nutrition from two-thirds to a simple majority. A national referendum would all the same be required.

This draft prompted debate, with strong opposition coming even from non-governmental organisations of other countries, as well every bit established and newly formed grassroots Japanese organisations, such as Relieve Article 9. Per the current constitution, a proposal for constitutional changes must be passed by a two-thirds vote in the Diet, then be put to a national plebiscite. Nonetheless, there was in 2005 no legislation in place for such a referendum.

Koizumi'southward successor Shinzō Abe vowed to push aggressively for Constitutional revision. A major step toward this was getting legislation passed to allow for a national referendum in April 2007.[47] By that time there was little public support for changing the Constitution, with a survey showing 34.5% of Japanese not wanting any changes, 44.5% wanting no changes to Article 9, and 54.vi% supporting the electric current interpretation on self-defense.[47] On the 60th ceremony of the Constitution, on 3 May 2007, thousands took to the streets in support of Article nine.[47] The Chief Cabinet secretarial assistant and other summit authorities officials interpreted the survey to mean that the public wanted a pacifist Constitution that renounces war, and may demand to be meliorate informed nearly the details of the revision debate.[48] The legislation passed by parliament specifies that a referendum on Constitutional reform could have identify at the primeval in 2010, and would need approval from a majority of voters.

2012 Draft [edit]

On 27 April 2012, the LDP drafted a new version of amendment[49] with an explanatory booklet[l] for general readers. The booklet states that the spirit of the amendment is to "brand the Constitution more suitable for Japan" by "drastically revising the translationese wording and the provisions based on the theory of natural man rights currently adopted in the Constitution".[51] The proposed changes includes:

  • Preamble: In the LDP draft, the Preamble declares that Japan is reigned by the Emperor and adopts the pop sovereignty and trias politica principles. The current Preamble refers to the government as a trust of the people (implying the "natural rights codified into the constitution by the social contract" model) and ensures people "the right to live in peace, costless from fear and want", just both mentions are deleted in the LDP draft.
  • Emperor: Overall, the LDP typhoon adopts a wording that sounds equally though the Emperor has greater power than nether the current Constitution.[52] The draft defines him equally "the head of the State" (Article 1).[53] Compared to the current Constitution, he is exempted from "the obligation to respect and uphold this Constitution" (Article 102). The draft defines Nisshōki as the national flag and Kimigayo the national anthem (Article 3).
  • Human rights: The LDP typhoon, as the accompanying booklet states, revises many of the human correct provisions currently adopted in the Constitution. The booklet describes the reason of these changes as: "Homo rights should take ground on the Land's history, civilisation and tradition" and "Several of the current Constitutional provisions are based on the Western-European theory of natural human rights; such provisions therefore require to be changed."[54] The draft lists every instance of the basic rights as something that is entitled by the State – equally opposed to something that human beings inherently possess – as seen in the draft provisions of "new human being rights" (see below).

The current Constitution has the phrase "public welfare" in four articles (Manufactures 12, 13, 22 and 29) and states that whatsoever human right is subject to brake when it "interferes with the public welfare". The majority of legal professionals argue that the spirit of such restriction against rights based on "public welfare" is to protect other people's rights from infringement.[55] In the LDP draft, every case of the phrase "public welfare" is replaced with a new phrase: "public interest and public gild". The booklet describes the reason for this change as "to enable the State to restrict human rights for the sake of purposes other than protecting people'southward rights from infringement",[54] but it remains unclear under what conditions the State tin can restrict man rights. It also explains that what "public order" means is "gild of society" and its intention is non to prohibit the people from making an objection to the government,[56] just it explains nothing nigh "public involvement".

Provisions regarding the people's rights modified or added in the LDP draft include:

  • [Individualism]: The LDP draft replaces the word "individuals" with "persons" (Article thirteen). This change reflects the draft authors' view that "excessive individualism" is an ethically unacceptable idea.[ citation needed ] [57]
  • Human rights and the supremacy of the constitution: The current constitution has Commodity 97 at the beginning of the "Supreme Law" affiliate, which stipulates that the constitution guarantees the basic human rights to the people. The electric current, prevalent estimation of Article 97 is that this article describes the essential reason why this constitution is the supreme law, which is the fact that the constitution's spirit is to guarantee man rights.[58] In the LDP typhoon, this article is deleted and the booklet does not explicate any reason for the deletion.
  • Liberty of assembly, association, speech and all other forms of expression: The LDP typhoon adds a new paragraph on Commodity 21, which enables the State to prohibit the people from performing expressions "for the purpose of interfering with public interest and public society". The LDP explain that this modify makes it easy for the State to take countermeasures confronting criminal organizations similar Aum Shinrikyo.[59]
  • Correct to holding: The LDP draft adds a new paragraph stating that the State shall define intellectual property rights "for the sake of promotion of the people's intellectual creativity" (Article 29).
  • Workers' rights: Workers have the right to participate in a labour union, only currently in that location is a dispute on whether public officials should be entitled to this right. The LDP draft add a new paragraph to make information technology clear that public officials shall not enjoy this right or role thereof (Article 28).
  • Freedom from torture and cruel punishments: Nether the electric current constitution, torture and barbarous punishments are "absolutely forbidden", simply the LDP draft deletes the word "absolutely" (Article 36). The reason for this change is not presented in the booklet.
  • "New human rights": The LDP typhoon adds four provisions regarding the concept collectively chosen "new human rights":[threescore] protection of privacy (Commodity 19–2), accountability of the Land (Article 21–2), environmental protection (Article 25–2), and rights of crime victims (Commodity 25–4). However, the draft just requires the State to make a good religion effort to meet the stated goals and does not entitle the people to these "rights", as the booklet points out.[61]
  • Obligations of the people: The LDP draft can be characterized by its obligation clauses imposed on the people. The current constitution lists iii obligations: to work (Article 27), to pay taxes as provided for by law (Commodity 30), and to have all boys and girls under their protection receive ordinary pedagogy equally provided for by law (Article 26). The LDP draft adds half dozen more than:
    • The people must respect the national anthem and flag (Article 3).
    • The people must be conscious of the fact that in that location are responsibilities and obligations in compensation for freedom and rights (Article 12).
    • The people must comply with the public interest and public order (Article 12).
    • The people must help one another amidst the members of a household (Article 24).
    • The people must obey commands from the Country or the subordinate offices thereof in a land of emergency (Article 99).
    • The people must uphold the constitution (Commodity 102).

Additionally, although defense force of the national territory (Commodity nine–three) and environmental protection (Article 25–2) are literally listed under the LDP draft as obligations of the State, these provisions let the Land call for the "cooperation with the people" to run into the goals provided, effectively functioning every bit obligation clauses on the people's side.

  • Equality: The current constitution guarantees equality to citizens, prohibiting whatsoever discrimination based on "race, creed, sexual practice, social status or family origin". The LDP draft adds "handicaps" (Articles xiv and 44) between "sexual practice" and "social status", improving the equality under the law. On the other mitt, the sentence "No privilege shall accompany any award of laurels, decoration or any distinction" in the current paragraph (ii) of Article xiv is deleted in the LDP draft, which means that the State shall be allowed to grant "privilege" as part of national awards. The reason for this change is not presented in the booklet.
  • National security: The LDP draft deletes the current provision declaring that armed forces and other state of war potential shall never be maintained, and adds new Manufactures 9-2 and 9-iii stating that the "National Defense force Strength" shall exist prepare and the Prime Minister shall exist its commander-in-master. Co-ordinate to the paragraph (three) of the new Article nine–ii, the National Defense force non only tin can defend the territory from a foreign attack and can participate in international peacekeeping operations, merely as well can operate to either maintain domestic public order or to protect private rights.
  • State of emergency: The LDP draft grants the Prime Government minister the dominance to declare a "state of emergency" in a national emergency including foreign invasions, domestic rebellions and natural disasters (Article 98). When in a country of emergency, the Cabinet tin enact orders that accept the effect of the laws passed by the [National Diet] (Commodity 99).
  • Relaxation of separation of religion and the State: The LDP draft deletes the current clause that prohibits the State from granting "political say-so" to a religious organization, and enables the Country to perform religious acts itself inside the scope of "social protocol or ethno-cultural practices" (Article 20).
  • Political control over the courts: Unlike the current constitution, which guarantees that the Supreme court judges shall not be dismissed unless the "review" procedure stipulated by the constitution, the LDP typhoon enables the Diet to ascertain this review process through a Diet-enacted law, not the constitution (Article 79). The draft also states that salary of a approximate – of both the Supreme Courtroom and junior courts – could be decreased in the same manner equally whatever other kinds of public officials (Articles 79 and 80) by the subordinate offices of the State (namely, the National Personnel Authority).
  • Further amendments: The LDP draft states that a uncomplicated bulk in the two Houses shall be acceptable for a motion for constitutional subpoena (Article 96). An bodily amendment shall all the same require a national referendum, but a simple majority in "the number of valid votes actually cast", equally opposed to "the number of a qualified voters" or "the number of votes", shall enact the amendment (Commodity 96).

2014 Reinterpretation [edit]

On 1 July 2014, a Cabinet meeting issued a decision on Commodity nine, reinterpreting the Constitution and to approve collective defense operations past the JSDF.[29] [28] This conclusion was challenged every bit violation of the Constitution by Japanese Federation of Bar Associations.[62] Historically, the government has maintained that Commodity 9 forbids the correct to commonage defense.[63]

Run across also [edit]

Onetime constitutions [edit]

  • Seventeen-article constitution (604) - rather a document of moral teachings, not a constitution in the modernistic meaning.
  • Meiji Constitution (1889)

Others [edit]

  • Article nine of the Japanese Constitution
  • Article 96 of the Japanese Constitution
  • Bones Constabulary for the Federal Republic of Germany
  • Constitution Memorial Day
  • Constitution of Italy
  • History of Nihon
  • Politics of Japan
  • Proposed Japanese constitutional referendum

Notes [edit]

  1. ^ a b Kristof, Nicholas D. (12 November 1995). "THE WORLD;Japan'south State Symbols: Now You See Them . . ". The New York Times . Retrieved 5 October 2019.
  2. ^ Kakinohana, Hōjun (23 September 2013). "個人の尊厳は憲法の基 ― 天皇の元首化は時代に逆行 ―". Japan Institute of Constitutional Law (in Japanese). Retrieved 25 October 2019.
  3. ^ a b "The Anomalous Life of the Japanese Constitution". Nippon.com. xv August 2017. Archived from the original on 11 August 2019. Retrieved 11 August 2019.
  4. ^ Takemae 2002, pp. 270–271.
  5. ^ Kapur 2018, p. xi.
  6. ^ a b Hunt, Michael (2013). The World Transformed:1945 to the Present. Oxford University Printing. p. 86. ISBN9780199371020.
  7. ^ a b Moritsugu, Ken (18 August 2016). "Biden'south remark on Nippon Constitution raises eyebrows". AP NEWS . Retrieved ten August 2019.
  8. ^ Kapur 2018, p. 9.
  9. ^ Ito, Masami, "Constitution once more faces calls for revision to run across reality", Nihon Times, 1 May 2012, p. three.
  10. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k fifty m Oda, Hiroshi (2009). "Sources of Law". Japanese Law. Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199232185.001.one. ISBN978-0-19-923218-5.
  11. ^ John Dower, Embracing Defeat, 1999, pp. 374, 375, 383, 384.
  12. ^ Dower, John W. (1999). Embracing defeat: Japan in the wake of Globe War Ii (1st ed.). New York: West.Due west. Norton & Co/New Press. pp. 365–367. ISBN978-0393046861.
  13. ^ "Beate Gordon, a drafter of Japan's Constitution, dies at 89". The Mainichi. 1 Jan 2013. Archived from the original on 18 February 2013. Retrieved 1 January 2013.
  14. ^ "Documents with Commentaries Part 2 Creation of Various Proposals to Reform the Constitution/2-sixteen Constitution Investigation Clan, "Outline of Constitution Draft," December 26, 1945". National Diet Library . Retrieved 10 Baronial 2020.
  15. ^ Inoue, Kyoko (1991). MacArthur's Japanese Constitution. University of Chicago Press. pp. 29–30. ISBN978-0-226-38391-0.
  16. ^ Inoue, Kyoko (1 Jan 1987). "Republic in the ambiguities of 2 languages and cultures: the nativity of a Japanese constitution". Linguistics. 25 (3): 595–606. doi:10.1515/ling.1987.25.3.595. ISSN 1613-396X. S2CID 144432801.
  17. ^ "Looking dorsum in Yearning". The Economist. Vol. 186. eight March 1958. p. fourteen.
  18. ^ Takemae 2002, p. xxxvii.
  19. ^ John Dower, Embracing Defeat, p.411: "categories of deletions and suppressions" in CCD'southward key log in June 1946.
  20. ^ Dower, p. 407
  21. ^ Hideki SHIBUTANI(渋谷秀樹)(2013) Japanese Constitutional Law. 2nd ed.(憲法　第2版) p487 Yuhikaku Publishing(有斐閣)
  22. ^ "衆憲資第90号「日本国憲法の制定過程」に関する資料" (PDF). Commission on the Constitution, The House of Representatives, Japan . Retrieved 23 August 2020.
  23. ^ a b "Text of the Constitution and Other Important Documents". National Diet Library. Archived from the original on 6 November 2020. Retrieved eight June 2015.
  24. ^ "Publication and Piece of work of the Constitution Popularization Society". Birth of the Constitution of Japan. National Nutrition Library of Japan. Archived from the original on 13 June 2013. Retrieved 24 May 2013.
  25. ^ "日本国憲法". National Archives of Japan. Archived from the original on 1 July 2015. Retrieved viii June 2015.
  26. ^ a b c Chen, Po Liang; Wada, Jordan T. (2017). "Can the Japanese Supreme Courtroom Overcome the Political Question Hurdle?". Washington International Law Periodical. 26: 349–79.
  27. ^ "Article 9 and the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty | Asia for Educators | Columbia University". afe.easia.columbia.edu . Retrieved 24 May 2021.
  28. ^ a b Takenaka, Linda Sieg, Kiyoshi (1 July 2014). "Japan takes historic footstep from postal service-war pacifism, OKs fighting for allies". Reuters . Retrieved 24 May 2021.
  29. ^ a b Umeda, Sayuri (September 2015). "Japan: Interpretations of Commodity nine of the Constitution". www.loc.gov . Retrieved 24 May 2021.
  30. ^ Kingston, Jeff (11 November 2020). "Nihon'due south quiet rearmament". Prospect Magazine . Retrieved 24 May 2021.
  31. ^ Levin, Mark (2001). "Essential Commodities and Racial Justice: Using Constitutional Protection of Nihon'southward Indigenous Ainu People to Inform Understandings of the United States and Japan". Rochester, NY. SSRN 1635451.
  32. ^ Levin, Mark (5 August 2010). "Ceremonious Justice and the Constitution: Limits on Instrumental Judicial Administration in Japan". Rochester, NY. SSRN 1653992.
  33. ^ "国会法". Business firm of Representatives, Japan . Retrieved 24 Baronial 2020.
  34. ^ "法律第五十一号(平一九・五・一八) 日本国憲法の改正手続に関する法律". Business firm of Representatives, Japan . Retrieved 22 August 2020.
  35. ^ "暮らしに役立つ情報 「国民投票法」って何だろう？". Cabinet Office Authorities of Japan . Retrieved 22 August 2020.
  36. ^ N. Ashibe, Kenpō (Constitutional Police force), fourth edn, supplemented by Yard. Takahashi (Tokyo, 2007), pp. 378–381
  37. ^ Hideki SHIBUTANI(渋谷秀樹)(2013) Japanese Constitutional Law. 2d ed.(憲法　第2版) p34-5 Yuhikaku Publishing(有斐閣)
  38. ^ a b c d "Japanese Studies: Ramble Revision Inquiry Projection". Reischauer Found of Japanese Studies, Harvard University. 2007. Archived from the original on 18 May 2007.
  39. ^ "憲法改正を目指す". Liberal Democratic Political party . Retrieved 22 August 2020.
  40. ^ "立党宣言・綱領". Liberal Democratic Party . Retrieved four September 2020.
  41. ^ "新党結成大会議案 芦田均関係文書". National Diet Library, Japan . Retrieved 4 September 2020.
  42. ^ "Citizens' Groups/NGOs". Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies, Harvard Academy. 2007. Archived from the original on 21 June 2007.
  43. ^ "Political Parties". Reischauer Constitute of Japanese Studies, Harvard University. 2010. Archived from the original on 21 Apr 2010.
  44. ^ "Labor Groups". Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies, Harvard University. 2007. Archived from the original on 6 February 2010.
  45. ^ "Constitutional revision research project: Spider web archives". Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies, Harvard University. 2007. Archived from the original on 9 March 2010.
  46. ^ "Response to Abe'due south drive: Support falls for amending Constitution". Japan Times. 17 April 2007. Archived from the original on thirteen August 2007.
  47. ^ a b c "Japan approves Constitution steps". BBC News. 14 May 2007. Retrieved xxx Apr 2010.
  48. ^ Support falls for amending Constitution | The Japan Times Online
  49. ^ Nihon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan, http://world wide web.jimin.jp/policy/policy_topics/pdf/seisaku-109.pdf
  50. ^ Japan-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, http://www.jimin.jp/policy/pamphlet/pdf/kenpou_qa.pdf Archived three Jan 2013 at the Wayback Motorcar
  51. ^ Nihon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, p. iii.
  52. ^ For example, the paragraph (4) of Article six of the LDP typhoon requires that the Emperor should obtain the shingen ("advice", especially 1 given from a subordinate to his superior) from the Cabinet, every bit opposed to the jogen to shōnin ("communication and blessing") as stipulated in the current Constitution, for his all acts in matters of the State. The booklet explains that the reason for this alter is considering the phrase jogen to shōnin sounds "offensive to the Emperor" (Nippon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, p. 8).
  53. ^ The LDP explains that the reason of this modify is considering the Emperor was formerly defined equally "the head of the Empire" in the Article iv of the Constitution of the Empire of Japan (Nihon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, p. 7).
  54. ^ a b Nihon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, p. 14.
  55. ^ For case, Ashibe, Nobuyoshi, Kenpou, fifth edition, edited by Takahashi, Kazuyuki, Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten (2011), pp. 100–101.
  56. ^ Nihon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, pp. 14–15.
  57. ^ "平成２３年５月３日". BLOGOS (in Japanese). Retrieved 13 August 2019.
  58. ^ Ashibe-Takahashi (2011), p. 12.
  59. ^ Nippon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, p. 17.
  60. ^ Ashibe-Takahashi (2011), pp. 118–124.
  61. ^ Nippon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A, p. xv.
  62. ^ "日本弁護士連合会：Stance Concerning the Cabinet'south Decision Approving the Exercise of the Right to Collective Self-Defence force, etc". www.nichibenren.or.jp . Retrieved 24 May 2021.
  63. ^ "日本弁護士連合会：集団的自衛権の行使等を容認する閣議決定に抗議し撤回を求める会長声明". 日本弁護士連合会 (in Japanese). Retrieved 24 May 2021.

References [edit]

  • The Constitution of Japan Projection 2004. Rethinking the Constitution: An Anthology of Japanese Opinion. Trans. by F. Uleman. Kawasaki, Japan: Japan Research Inc., 2008. ISBN 1-4196-4165-4.
  • Kapur, Nick (2018). Japan at the Crossroads: Conflict and Compromise after Anpo. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. ISBN978-0674984424.
  • Kishimoto, Koichi. Politics in Modern Nihon. Tokyo: Japan Repeat, 1988. ISBN 4-915226-01-8. Pages 7–21.
  • Matsui, Shigenori. The Constitution of Japan: A Contextual Analysis. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2011. ISBN 978-ane-84113-792-half-dozen.
  • Hook, Glenn D., ed. (2005). Contested governance in Japan : sites and issues. London: RoutledgeCurzon. ISBN978-0415364980.
  • Moore, Ray A.; Robinson, Donald L. (2004). Partners for democracy : crafting the new Japanese land under MacArthur. Oxford University Press. ISBN978-0195171761.
  • Takemae, Eiji (2002). Inside GHQ: The Allied Occupation of Japan and its Legacy. Translated by Ricketts, Robert; Swann, Sebastian. New York: Continuum. ISBN0826462472.
  • "Special Result Constitutional Law in Nippon and the Uk". King's Law Journal. ii (2). 2015.
  • Public Domain This article incorporates text from this source, which is in the public domain . Japan: A state study. Federal Research Sectionalisation.

External links [edit]

  • Total text of Constitution from the Cabinet
  • Constitution of Nihon at Projection Gutenberg
  • The Constitution of Japan public domain audiobook at LibriVox
  • Birth of the Constitution of Japan
  • Teruki Tsunemoto, Trends in Japanese Constitutional Police force Cases: Important Judicial Decisions for 2004, trans. Daryl Takeno, Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Periodical
  • Teruki Tsunemoto, Trends in Japanese Constitutional Constabulary Cases: Important Legal Precedents for 2005, trans. John Donovan, Yuko Funaki, and Jennifer Shimada, Asian-Pacific Police & Policy Journal
  • Teruki Tsunemoto, Trends in Japanese Constitutional Law Cases: Important Legal Precedents for 2006, trans. Asami Miyazawa and Angela Thompson, Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal
  • Teruki Tsunemoto, Trends in Japanese Constitutional Law Cases: Important Legal Precedents for 2007, trans. Mark A. Levin and Jesse Smith, Asian-Pacific Law & Policy Journal
  • Library of Congress Country Study on Japan
  • Beate Sirota Gordon (Blog about Beate Sirota Gordon and the documentary film "The Gift from Beate")
  • Reischauer Institute of Japanese Studies at Harvard University
  • 新憲法草案 (PDF). Liberal Democratic Party'due south Center to Promote Enactment of a New Constitution website (in Japanese). Archived from the original (PDF) on vii Feb 2006. Retrieved 3 February 2006. Shin Kenpou Sou-an, Draft New Constitution. Every bit released by the Liberal Democratic Political party on 22 November 2005.
  • 新憲法制定推進本部. Liberal Democratic Party website (in Japanese). Archived from the original on 10 January 2006. Retrieved 3 Feb 2006. Spider web folio of the Shin Kenpou Seitei Suishin Honbu, Center to Promote Enactment of a New Constitution, of the Liberal Autonomous Political party.
  • 日本国憲法改正草案 (PDF). Liberal Democratic Party (in Japanese). Retrieved 27 December 2012. Nippon-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan, Subpoena Typhoon of the Constitution of Nihon. Every bit released past the Liberal Democratic Political party on 27 April 2012.
  • 日本国憲法改正草案Q&A (PDF). Liberal Democratic Party (in Japanese). Archived from the original (PDF) on 3 Jan 2013. Retrieved 27 December 2012. Japan-koku Kenpou Kaisei Souan Q & A. As released past the Liberal Democratic Party in October 2012.

hickscour1943.blogspot.com

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitution_of_Japan

0 Response to "How Should a New Family Be With a New Constitution After Ww2 in Japan"

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Iklan Atas Artikel

Iklan Tengah Artikel 1

Iklan Tengah Artikel 2

Iklan Bawah Artikel