Why the Japanese System Isn't True Democracy?

UMJ_web_logo

Why the Japanese System Isn't True Democracy?
By: Okabe Kazuaki
The UMJ Volume 2.3

When asked if Japan is a democratic nation, one can say--sarcasm aside--that Japan is indeed a constitutional democracy. Elections are held, and the country has a representative-style parliament.

Elections allow ordinary citizens to swap those at the pinnacle of power and are undeniably an important constituent of democracy. However, having long covered American democracy, it has become clear to me that democracy doesn't consist merely of elections and parliament. The following are six important elements Japanese democracy lacks.

1- The commission system 2- Public hearings 3- Referenda 4- Autonomous local government 5- Non-profit organizations (NPOs) 6- Civil participation in the enactment of regulations (ordinances, statutes)

Commissions, the "Fourth Power Structure"

The most difficult to explain are commissions. Also called boards or committees, these are independent administrative bodies. They have a degree of legislative and juridical authority, and are designed to dilute power.

On a federal level, some examples relatively well known in Japan are the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), which regulates the communications industries, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which keeps a watchful eye on the finance industry, and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which sued the U.S. subsidiary of Mitsubishi Motors in federal court in 1996. Commissions have a good degree of independence; even the president cannot remove the head of a commission (the commissioner) from his or her post. There are also numerous commissions on a state, county, and municipal level.

Unlike "minister's councils" or "deliberation committees"

common in Japan, which issue recommendations, commissions have the power to actually make policy. The minutes of meetings are disclosed, and meetings are often opportunities for citizens to express their opinions. Commissions also have a role in the release of administrative information. When seeking information, citizens first go to the commission in charge of the bureau or department in question. In essence, commissions are a means for civil participation and a check on the bureaucracy. American-style independent administrative commissions are even called the "Fourth Power Structure," after the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

Public hearings encourage policy suggestions from citizens

The CPUC (California Public Utilities Commission, which is in charge of regulating phone companies, power companies, and public transport operators.), which I often cover in the course of work, held a total of 641 days of public hearings in the state in 1994 alone. That works out to two public hearings being held somewhere in the state of California alone, each day--by this one entity. One cannot even begin to count the total number of public hearings being held if those on a federal, county, and municipal level are included.

In Japan there are hardly any public hearings. Those that do occur, do so only in form. Moreover, the speakers are predetermined, and advance "adjustments" are carried out to make sure the number of speakers in favor is equal to the number against. Speaking times are strictly limited. But in the U.S.--for example in the case of the CPUC--there are no limitations on the number of speakers, nor the length of speaking time. Those who have something to say come up one after another to make their point. You may think that this would allow things to get out of hand, but if there are that many opportunities for participating, the effect is to the contrary; citizens are less prone to making lengthy speeches out of spite.

Citizens short on time and money can't that easily participate in public hearings day after day. The topics discussed, too, become ever more detailed, and hence participants can't get away with merely mouthing pent-up complaints. As a result, citizens were forced to develop a system of NPOs (non-profit organizations), build solid financial foundations, hire trained experts, and shift towards building serious movements for advocating policy.

26 states have a referenda system

Referenda are easier to comprehend. In the U.S., municipalities and 26 states have systems in place for holding referenda. Citizens vote directly on bills without involving the legislature. Referenda are a legislative right citizens put into action when it is felt the legislature may not necessarily be reflecting public intent.

In San Francisco, for example, an election guide as fat as a weekly magazine is distributed to voters at every election. The guide carries explanations of a dozen or so municipal and state propositions, with selected arguments in favor and against. One doesn't know which way to vote unless one studies the issues carefully.

This requires considerable effort, and not a few voters rely on recommendations from organzations or newspapers they trust.

Japanese municipalities are mere tendrils of central power

You may think that autonomous local governments also exist in Japan. If one takes a look at American local governments, however, one finds out that Japanese local governments aren't really the autonomous entities they are supposed to be.

For instance, American local governments come into existence only once local residents reach a resolution to do so. Hence there are huge swathes of territory in the U.S. called unincorporated areas, which do not come under any local government. In California, for example, these areas are administered by counties, or subdivisions of the state. Japanese local governments are similar to counties and can be classified as mere tendrils of the central authority.

Decentralized "public services" by NPOs

Non-profit organizations are being mentioned in Japan of late and are "alternative" public services that do not involve elections or legislative councils. For example, while low-rent housing in Japan is supplied by metropolitan or municipal governments, in the U.S. most of it is built by (non-profit) citizens' groups. While substantial funding does come from the government, regional development organizations autonomously established by citizens (usually called Community Development Corporations) build low-rent housing that fits the ethnicity and culture of the area.

America has 1.5 million NPOs; these earn 6.3% of the national income, and employ more paid workers (9.66 million) than the federal and state governments put together. Instead of selecting a legislative council and providing uniform public services throughout the nation, citizens create movements to tackle problems directly and even build up independent citizen-driven services for the "public" good. Official schemes to support and strengthen community activity are available in the form of corporate income tax breaks, tax deductions for charitable donations, discounted postal fees, etc.

Town meeting is basis of the American system

The very notion of public participation in the procedure for enacting ordinances and statutes is probably unknown in Japan. Here there isn't even sufficient public participation in the normal legislative process, and the implementation of the law, in the form of ordinances, ministerial ordinances, and the like, is carried out entirely by civil servants, who pass it on to the public in the form of officialese set in stone.

Yet in the U.S. there is a system in place for incorporating public opinion in the execution of laws. The government bureau or department in charge publishes a draft, and opinions are collected from the public over a period of one to two months. Only once these have been taken into consideration are the final regulations drawn up.

In addition, a wide range of systems enabling public participation exist in the U.S., such as juries in trials, public disclosure regulations, and environmental impact assessments. The basis of American democracy is the "town meeting," in which all the citizens of a small frontier community gathered to decide matters. As society became more complex, representative democracy and bureaucracy took hold, but the spirit of the early direct democracy lives on and is continually being renewed.

Japan, meanwhile, experienced 300 years of control by the shogunate plus imperial reign in the Meiji Era, with thorough hierarchical rule and bureaucratic control throughout. Only lately has democracy emerged, in the form of the parliamentary system--the phase in which we are still at. Japanese democracy still has a long way to go.