loading assets

Apr 15, 2014

Asahi Poll Shows 63% Oppose Exercising Right to Collective Self-Defense

Asahi Poll Shows 63% Oppose Exercising Right to Collective Self-Defense

Considering that major mass media like NHK always provide news coverage as if they curried favor with the Abe administration, I am slightly surprised at decent results of an opinion poll survey.  I think this is mainly because something like illusion or ignorant mist covering the earth has been blown away.  I suppose that you feel refreshed as if mist were clearing up to some extent.  Magnetic control of thoughts by artificial intelligence has actually influenced human consciousness.  Since such artificial intelligence has been destroyed, however, people have been liberated from the condition of blind acceptance.


Masatoshi Takeshita
April 7, 2014


English translation of a Japanese article: TheAsahi Shimbun Degital – April 6, 2014 – (1)

Asahi Poll Shows 63% Oppose Exercising Right to Collective Self-Defense


Right to Collective Self-Defense

While the Abe administration has sharpened its stance toward approving the use of the right to collective self-defense, the Asahi Shimbun has conducted a mail-in opinion poll survey across the country to look into voters’ perception of the Constitution.  The survey results show that those who responded that Japan “should not lift ban on exercising the right to collective self-defense” account for 63%, which was 56% in the last year survey, while responders who said “should lift ban” account for 29%.  There is also an increase in those who think Japan “should not revise the Constitution” and pacifist-oriented attitude has been seen in every field.

Even more than 50 % of supporters of the Abe administration or the LDP also said that Japan “should not lift ban.”

Although the Abe administration tries to move to have Japan allow the exercise of the right by changing constitutional interpretation, 56% of those allowing the exercise of the right answered that Japan should revise the Constitution while 40% of them answered that it is sufficient just to change the interpretation by the government.  It turns out that those who agree with the prime minister account for only 12% of all respondents.

----- 
English translation of a Japanese article: TheTokyo Shimbun – April 5, 2014 –

Right to Collective Self-Defense – Sophistry called “Limited Allowance”

Approval of the exercise of the right within a limited range of circumstances isn’t sophistry, is it?  It is about the “theory of approval of limited exercise” of the right to collective self-defense.  The government’s interpretation of the Constitution has been made through many years of discussions.  The Constitution is not allowed to be revised in accordance with the intentions of just one cabinet.

The “theory of approval of limited exercise of the right” means approval of the limited exercise of the right to collective self-defense for a specific case, for example, “in the case of defense of U.S. warships under attack in the vicinity of Japan by the Self Defense Forces”  This theory was proposed by LDP Vice President Masahiko Komura.

His proposal is based on a 1959 Supreme Court “ruling in the Sunagawa case” over the constitutionality of the U.S. military presence in Japan.

As for Japan’s self-defense right, the ruling says: “It is indisputable that, as an act of exercising its proper powers as a nation, Japan is allowed to take self-defense measures that are necessary for ensuring its existence.”

Referring to this part of the ruling, Mr. Takamura made the case that “exercising the right to collective self-defense in some situations falls under the minimum necessary exercise of self-defense rights and that defense of a U.S. warship is “interpreted as the minimum necessary measures.”

Some of New Komeito and LDP lawmakers take a strong cautious stance toward whether to approve the exercise of the right to collective self-defense, which has been interpreted unconstitutional by the government, as constitutional.  It is likely that the theory of approval of limited exercise of the right has emerged as a tool for persuading such members.

However, it is impossible to do so.

It is nothing but a jump in logic to use the ruling made in the times when the topic of discussion was about the constitutionality of individual self-defense as a rational for approval of partially exercising the right to collective self-defense, a New Komeito executive member says.

In a meeting with Mr. Komura, New Komeito leader Natsuo Yamaguchi reportedly showed a cautious stance toward the theory of limited exercise of the right by saying the government should initially examine the applicability of the right to individual self-defense.  It stands to reason.

The true nature of an argument over collective self-defense right lies in whether it is valid to resort to force to defend a foreign country even though Japan is not directly attacked and whether the government’s interpretation of the Constitution that has gone through long years of discussions is allowed to be changed in accordance with the intention of just one cabinet.

Even limited exercise is nothing less than a fundamental change of the government’s constitutional interpretation.

Once this way is accepted, the government can do anything by interpretation favorable to it regardless of articles of the Constitution or legislative intent.  The Constitution would be a dead law and “constitutionalism” in which power observes the Constitution would become a mere fa├žade.  The possibility of getting involved in an erroneous war like the Iraqi war would become more likely.

We should not consider quite good for approval for limited exercise.  Every lawmaker should realize that constitutionalism is on the verge of a crisis.





No comments:

Post a Comment