Insisting on Inviting Russian President

Without any persuasive reasons, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe shows positive eagerness in improving diplomatic relation with Russia for this summer. Despite negative reputation of dictatorial President Vladimir Putin in Western community, Abe distinguishes bilateral relationship with Russia from international politics. He perhaps thinks that diplomacy to Russia may be a booster for his domestic support.

In a telephone talk last week, Abe and Putin reconfirmed the schedule of Putin to visit Japan later this year and continuous dialogue for progress on the issue of disputed Northern Territory. The talk was suggested from Japan side. Abe was reportedly willing to invite Putin this year to make a momentum on Northern Territory issue with seventieth anniversary from the end of World War II.

Unfortunately, Abe has received a negative sign from Russia. Russian congress passed a law for banning salmon fishery with drifting net in the area of Russian exclusive economic zone. With the law, Japanese salmon fishing boats in Hokkaido will be excluded from Northern Pacific Ocean, which many cause job loss and price hike of Japan’s traditional resource of protein. “I hope you to continue a traditional cooperation between Japanand Russia,” told Abe to Putin in the telephone talk.

Putin pretends to be willing to accept Abe’s request of visiting Japan. “Every issue can be solved,” told Putin on Northern Territory in the interview with foreign media. Russian economy is getting weak with sanction from Western countries, which have been critical on Russia’s annexation of Crimea. As a counter measure against Western coalition, Putin approaches Japan.

Abe is going to send Director of National Security Council to Moscow early in July to pave the way to Putin’s visit. He hopes to take steps to Foreign Ministers meeting in late August or early September, summit meeting in an international conference such as Group 20 in November, and Putin’s visit to Japan before the end of this year, according to diplomatic staffs.

Abe has mostly no opportunity to gain further internal popularity after this summer. Economy is not getting better amidst volatile market on foreign exchange and stocks. Relationship with China or South Korea cannot be improved with his consistency on historical revisionism. There has been no positive sign form North Korea on abduction issue. Security legislature is causing broad criticism on his unilateral reinterpretation of the Constitution of Japan. 

But, it is unlikely for Abe to get strong position in diplomacy with Russia.Russia has no reason to make a compromise on a territory issue, when Russian people give strong support on annexation of Crimea. Even if Abe will be successful in inviting Putin, the outcome may be something bitter to him.

Internationally Endorsed Man-made Disaster

International Atomic Energy Agency delivered the final report on the accident in First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant. It listed up a number of reasons why the accident could not be avoided, most of which were caused by human error. It also urged Japan to take measures against future accident. However, Japanese government and power companies are too enthusiastic in reconstructing nuclear business by persuading safety of nuclear power plant to the people in Japan and the world.

In the preface of the report, IAEA defined that Fukushima accident, brought by great tsunami, had been the worst nuclear accident after Chernobyldisaster in 1986. It also warned that the world needed to remember the effect of Fukushima accident, which caused evacuation of over one hundred thousand residents around the plant most of whom are still in evacuation.

As a major reason of the accident, the report raised a mindset that nuclear generation was safe and there would be no severe accident. Power companies firmly believed in that notion and regulatory organization in the government was not skeptical on it. Lost of all power supply and simultaneous crises in multiple reactors in one plant could not be imagined. No responsible governmental organization did not existed before the accident.

In the investigation in Japan in 2007, IAEA found that there was no legal regulation to consider accident that would exceed architectural standard and required Nuclear and Industrial Safety Agency to play a major role for regulation. In spite of that, Tokyo Electric Power Company refused implementing it.

According to the report, TEPCO did not take necessary measures, while they had an assessment that 15 meters high tsunami wave would arrive, if M8.8 level earthquake had happened in offshore Fukushima. The calculation for damage by earthquake and tsunami did not abide by international standard that would assume the bigger earthquake than the biggest ever might happen. The IAEA standard for safety assessment was not applied and the workers were not trained well for disaster management.

No indication of major damage on structure, system or tools for safety was found, which indicated the accident was overwhelmingly the man-made disaster. “In Japan, a mindset, that nuclear power plant was technologically designed to be firm and sufficiently protected, had been reinforced thorough decades,” told the report. That was a main reason of “unpredictable disaster.”

Nuclear power companies are still seeking the profit by resumption of halted plants, while TEPCO cannot control contaminated water leaking to the Pacific Ocean. Japan is ignoring a warning from IAEA again.

Before Accusing Local Governments

The government of Japan officially decided new framework of reconstruction measures for the region devastated by Great East Japan Earthquake. For the second half of a decade-long reconstruction period, FY 2016-2020, it prepared \6.5 trillion for supporting local communities. Although the framework required local governments certain amount of payment, some newspapers applauded attitude of national government, focusing rather on discount of local burden from initial \30 billion to final \22 billion. But, the criticism is on the attitude of national government to force “independence” of suffered people without realizing true situation of them.

Mainichi Shimbun believed that the framework was mostly accepted by local governments. Introducing the effort of national government on reviewing legal regulation, the paper reported that failed bids for reconstruction projects were mostly eliminated by lowering labor cost. It quoted the comment of an officer for Ministry of Finance, which expected serious efforts of local governments to determine priority of reconstruction projects. The comment was based on a notion that local governments had been innocent on appropriate spending of money. It was an effusion of bureaucratic elitism always fooling local governments.

Nikkei Shimbun, unusually, reported various concerns of local community. It picked up a construction project of road connecting devastated Miyako city with inland Morioka city. While national government supported 100% for constructing the road in first half of reconstruction period, it decided to demand local governments \1.4 billion for the second half. The road is called “road of life” by the residents of Miyako, because it is needed to transport patients in serious illness from Miyako where no hospital with highly advanced medical equipments exists. Nikkei quoted a comment of an old man who was living in a temporary house in Miyako city. The man was transported, with illness of cerebral infraction, to a hospital in Morioka by ambulance through winding old road in March. “New road is necessary for us to stay living in our hometown,” told the man to Nikkei.

National government keeps on criticizing inappropriate spending of reconstruction budget in devastated area. However, it was national government that distributed reconstruction budget to a number of projects in all over Japan, which was nothing to do with reconstruction of Tohoku. Before accusing local government, bureaucrats in Tokyo need to take a look at themselves.

It is impossible for local governments, suffered from a great natural disaster with a magnitude inexperienced for a thousand years, to apply reconstruction money with strict correctness to the projects. Taking enough time and elaborating a tailored plan for each local community is needed the most.

Strange Culture and Art of LDP

The conservatives in America strictly apply freedom rights to their policies. In Japan, conservative politicians ignore those rights. Young lawmakers affiliated with Liberal Democratic Party held a meeting, in which they discussed how to crush newspapers and TV stations down. When they are frustrated with news reports, those lawmakers think such reports should be eliminated, not persuading reporters with discussion or appropriate policies. This is how young democracy is deteriorated.

Council of Culture and Art in LDP, a policy forum of young lawmakers led by a member of House of Representatives Minoru Kihara, had a meeting on Wednesday. In the meeting, an eccentric conservative novelist, Naoki Hyakuta, made a keynote speech, in which he criticized Japanese media as devaluing Japan.

According to an article of Asahi Shimbun, the meeting was closed to media after Hyakuta’s speech and frustration to media reports were flourished from some of forty lawmakers attended there. “To punish media, choking their income from advertisement must be the best way. I hope the party to instruct economic organizations, like Keidanren, not to pay for a corporation misleading Japan,” told Hideo Onishi, a Representative from Tokyo.

Then, their topic shifted to Okinawa, where consistent protest against relocation plan of U.S. military base. “It was a corruption of post-war conservatism,” told Takashi Nagao, a Representative from Nagasaki, “to establish a special media structure in Okinawa. People’s opinion in Okinawawas twisted and hijacked by the leftists.” Following Nagao, Hyakuta encouraged the lawmakers to crush down two local newspapers in Okinawa. “The leftist media accuse that American soldiers rape Okinawan girls, because U.S. bases are there. But it’s a terrible lie in terms of statistics. The ratio of rape crime between man and woman in Okinawa is higher than those made by U.S. soldiers there,” told Hyakuta.

The opposite parties denounced those young LDP lawmakers in the Committee of Security Legislature on Friday. Urged by committee members, Chairman Yasukazu Hamada (LDP) confirmed the facts and expressed a regret on it. “Many people say many things. I cannot apologize for it without reconfirmation about the facts that was not made on my watch,” said Abe in the committee. The discussion on controversial security legislature will be further delayed by this gaffe scandal.

Heaven’s net has large mashes, but nothing escapes. The discussion points of young legislatures were likely to be what were always in Abe’s mind. The reason why Okinawa was targeted was because it was the region with biggest protest against Abe administration. Abe administration has been no choice to rely on the authority of national government, but it used it in a wrong way. But in democracy, a government cannot crush people’s opinion, which is a fundamental content of democratic society.

Insisting on Personal Statement

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe reportedly decided not to deliver 70^th anniversary statement from the end of war this summer in a manner of cabinet decision. He seemed to have realized that sincere apology to Asian nations and his personal view to history would not be resonant. It will be a symbolic political compromise for Abe, who have been unilateral to achieve conservative agenda.

Murayama Statement in 1995 for 50^thanniversary and Koizumi Statement in 2005 for 60^th anniversary were delivered as cabinet decisions. Abe has been willing to issue his statement this year as his original version, which was supposed to be with a unique point of view on history. He wanted to delete “sincere apology” or other negative expressions for apology in former statements. But, his attitude to history was criticized not only by Asian nations including the Chinese or Koreans, but United States. Abe’s historical views were something the winners could not accept.

Coalition partner of Abe administration, Komeito, has been careful on what kind of statement Abe would launch. Although Abe has been saying that he would succeed former statements “as a whole,” Komeito was skeptical on Abe’s maneuver, which might be stimulating the negative sentiment in China and South Korea. It is likely that Abe refrained from bothering coalition structure by avoiding official statement.

But, it is sure that China or South Korea will criticize Abe, if he delivers personal opinion on past history of relation with Asian nations, even it is going to be in an unofficial style. Although he likes to separate his personal position from status of Prime Minister, it is only viable inside Japan, where he still has relatively high popularity. That concept cannot be accepted by international relations.

So, what is the meaning of Prime Minister’s statement? Is it a message to neighbor nations, or an opportunity for him to open his personal opinion? This Prime Minister is such a little boy who does not distinguish private conviction from his public status.

Former Prime Minister, Tomi-ichi Murayama, criticized Abe’s attitude to the statement, saying “Considering current situation, he had better to deliver with cabinet decision.” Murayama accused Abe of making things complicated and unilateral decision not to make it in official manner.

China and South Korea are closely watching not on the style of the statement, but on the substitute. “How Japanese political leader are taking action on historical issue are closely watched by Asian people. He needs to reflect Japan’s history and achieve credibility through actions,” told a spokesman with Chinese Foreign Ministry. Abe’s personal statement may harm a momentum for improvement of diplomatic relation with China or South Korea.

Legislation Takes Time

With deliberated political consideration, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe and Liberal Democratic Party decided to extend current session of National Diet to late September. A move for the unprecedentedly long extension passed the Diet on Monday. The reason was clear. Abe wanted to save as long period of time as possible for security legislature to be approved in both Houses. Although he was pretending to be careful to appeal democratic process, it was power politics based on great majority in the Diet.

House of Representatives passed a move to extend current session by ninety-five days until September 27^th on Monday, which marked the longest extension in the post-war history of Japan. “Though it’s going to be a hot summer, we need to work hard for the people,” told Secretary General of LDP, Sadakazu Tanigaki.

Constitution of Japan determines that a bill passes the Diet when it is approved with two thirds of majority in the House of Representatives, even if the House of Councillors does not approve within sixty days from the day it accepted the bill from the House of Representatives. LDP calculated that the session needed to be extended until late September, based on the calculation that security legislation would pass the House of Representatives by mid-July at the latest.

But, this strategy on Diet schedule is highly unusual. It is likely that LDP will be criticized of its maneuver with majority power by the opposite parties. The security bills have been facing strong opposition from the public. Newspapers have been accusing Abe administration that the legislation was clearly unconstitutional. It is unlikely that the bills are passing easily, because power politics on the great majority may accept negative response from the public.

The leading parties are determined to pass the bills within this session even how the stakes are high. If Abe cannot make it, credibility of him will be broken down, because he promised U.S. President Barack Obama to pass the bills by this summer. To maintain his political momentum, with unpredictable economic trends for the second half of this year, Abe wants to make the achievement sure as soon as possible.

The opposite parties are campaigning against unilateral legislature. “The people do not understand the bills. Abe needs to close this session and submit new version of legislation in next session,” told President of Democratic Party of Japan, Katsuya Okada. But, Innovation Party is showing strange move by considering its original version of security legislatures. It must be a helping hand for LDP, because such action may lead to discussion for joint amendment between LDP and Innovation Party. Struggle on security legislation between the parties will be extended long.

History of Henoko Relocation Plan

In the early morning of Okinawa Memorial Day, emerald water in O-uraBay was softly lapping on the sand. The boring equipments stood in the middle of the bay looked like taking a rest to pray for war victims seventy years ago. But, once Ministry of Defense and U.S. Force resumes the construction of Henoko Air Base, protest in Okinawawill be vitalized again. As long as the people in Okinawa are firmly against the relocation plan, Henoko base will not be operated.

In 1999, Cabinet led by Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi made a decision to build an alternative facility in Henoko along with returning U.S. Futenma Marine Air Base to Japan. The decision was based on an agreement with Government of Okinawa with two conditions. One was that the alternative facility would be temporary one with expiration in fifteen years later. Another was that the facility was to be dual use of military and civilian with consideration of economic development in northern part of Okinawa Island. But, actual construction was delayed with some reasons.

Turning point came in 2005 and 2006. In the consecutive negotiations between Japan and U.S. government, there appeared another plan, which would build a new base in Henoko. The plan was different from former one in terms of building two runways in the area close to the coast and it did not have any expiration and dual-usage. Crucially enough, government of Japan and U.S.agreed on the plan without any consent from Okinawa.

People in Okinawa became furious. For them, accepting 1999 plan was painful enough. Periodical use of the facility and economic consideration for the region was the most persuasive points to the people. New plan was something far from acceptable.

In 2009, a strange Prime Minister offered a new deal. Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama declared that Futenma Air Base should be moved to foreign land, or other place in Japan at least. In his effort to look for alternative place, people in Okinawa got to know that burden of military base has not to be vested on Okinawa, but somewhere in Japan. They realized that they do not necessarily have to make a painful decision. Once Hatoyama revealed a truth of Futenma relocation issue, spilled water never get back to a glass.

At the beginning of Shinzo Abe administration, stake was too high already. But, this authoritarian administration made matters significantly worse. It unilaterally started actual construction in Henoko, ignoring long history of negotiation with Okinawaand public opinion appeared in elections. There is no politician around Abe who knows well about the history. Political novices in Abe administration firmly believe in power of national government and face consistent protest from Okinawa. Killing regional will is not something a democratic government would do.

Go Home, Mr. Prime Minister

Okinawa marked the seventieth anniversary from the end of major actions in Battle in Okinawa on Tuesday, which cost over two hundred millions of lives both on Japan and United States. A half of all victims were the citizens in Okinawa. That is why the people in Okinawa gather and pray for their relatives every year. In the ceremony for the anniversary, some attendees exclaimed “Go home!” to a guest there. It was not toward the U.S. Ambassador to Japan, but Japanese Prime Minister, Shinzo Abe.

Abe was making a speech for the ceremony. When he was introduced and walking to the podium, some people in the audience expressed frustration. “We have to be proud of our history these seventy years, in which we hated war and entirely walked the way to the peace, and make constant efforts to achieve world peace,” Abe stressed. But, someone was skeptical on what Abe was meaning, saying “Don’t make a lie.” Abe is such an unpopular politician among the people in Okinawa.

Making clear contrast, Governor of Okinawa, Takeshi Onaga, received enthusiastic supports. In his speech of Declaration of Peace, Onaga emphasized equal responsibility of Japanese people for their security. When he said “On relocation of Futenma U.S. Marine Base, people in Okinawa expressed their opinion in the election last year, and it is difficult to build new base in Henoko,” “Okinawan people can never be tolerable to the concepts such as moving the most dangerous base in the world to Henoko or requiring Okinawa alternative plan,” “It is impossible to build a foundation for peace without securing liberty, equality, human rights and democracy of the people,” or “We demand the government not to be captured by a fixed idea, but to decide to stop construction of new base in Henoko and review the policy for reducing burden on Okinawa,” broad applause occurred from the audience.

Current protest against Henoko relocation plan is getting eccentric. Along with personal interpretation of history by Prime Minister, as seen in unique recognition of comfort woman issue, growing people uphold a concept that Okinawa has been colonized by Japan or United States from the time of annexation of Ryukyus in 1879. This concept is becoming a reason for movement of Okinawa’s independence. Government of Japan has been taking no measures against the movement.

Concentration of military bases in Okinawa causes further anxiety on being targeted by a potential enemy. Okinawa experienced orphanage twice: one was being sacrifice for protecting mainland of Japan in Battle of Okinawa and another was uneasy status under U.S. administration even after resumption of sovereignty with San Francisco Treaty in 1951. For Okinawa, reinforcement of security cooperation between Japan and U.S. is nothing but a stimulus to China or North Korea, possibly making Okinawa a killing field again.

Effort for Diplomatic Improvement

Japan and Republic of Korea saluted on Monday fiftieth anniversary from normalization of diplomatic relationship in 1965. For face-saving of each nation, both governments agreed on having ceremony with attendance of their top leader in Tokyo or Seoul, pretending to be willing to improve their bilateral relationship. However, relationship between two of the most developed countries in Asia is still in the worst situation they had not experienced in post-war era.

Japan has a long history with KoreanPeninsula. From the 4^th to 7^th century, Japan was involved in wars in Korean peninsula. Korean people still have negative sentiment against Japan’s advance to Korea, led by Shogun Hideyoshi Toyotomi, in the 16^th century. After the end of World War II, Japan’s colonization of Korea ended and Japanand South Korea exchanged the Treaty on Basic Relation.

But, their relationship in these fifty years was not completely normal. On Annexation Treaty in 1910, Japanese government recognized that the treaty lost its validity with new treaty in 1965, while South Korea asserted that Annexation Treaty was “null and void” in itself. The history of colonization is still unacceptable for Korean people. Japanese government interpreted Treaty on Basic Relation as a settlement of all requirements for compensation from the Koreans, including former comfort women. Seeing deterioration of Japan’s sincere reflection on the war, Korean government took nationalistic policy as seen in a disputed island, Takeshima.

On the eve of fiftieth anniversary, ROK Minister of Foreign Affairs, Yun Byung-se visited Japan for the first time in these four years. In the meeting with Japanese Minister of Foreign Affairs, Fumio Kishida, Yun approved registration of industrial remains in Japan to World Heritage. Although the Koreans had been negative on this issue, because those old facilities were the places where the Koreans were forced hard labor, ROK offered cooperation in return for Japan’s support on future registration of historical district of Paekche, Korea.

In the ceremony of fiftieth anniversary in Tokyo, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe emphasized future-looking diplomacy between Japan and South Korea. But, it did not settle the dispute over comfort woman at all. South Koreastill requires Japanese political leaders to have “appropriate” viewpoints for their bilateral history. But, conservative tendency of Japanese politics does not allow the leaders appeasing approach to the Koreans.

After a half century from the end of devastating war, political leaders in Japan need to review the history again. While they are proud of reconstruction history of Japan with rapid economic growth, they need to remember the fact that there have been moderate international relationships, even with South Korea needless to say. Future-looking diplomacy will be cultivated with recognition of standpoint of Japan in international relations.

Deregulation for Unemployment

A consultative committee in the government of Japan, Regulation Reform Conference, submitted a new report on economic deregulation. It proposed a new rule for paving a way for employers to fire their employees in an unfair manner at least with compensation. While Japanese economy had been shrinking after Lehman Shock, labor market suffered from inappropriate employment, including extremely low wage or easy dismissal. In this stage of economic growth, the government stands by employer’s side.

In 2013, there were 195 court decisions that recognized unfairness among 966 lawsuits on employment dismissal. Although the winners of the lawsuits should be returned to the job they once belonged, they had actually been forced to leave it with variable uneasiness to remain. The committee thought that those employees needed to be saved with compensation, only when they accept it.

However, new rule may generate further unfair dismissal. According to the experts, there already is negotiation between employer and employee in a case of unfair dismissal, in which employer pays for compensation in addition to the amount court ordered. New rule may lead to discount of the compensation. While trade union was firmly protested against that rule, economic leaders have been lobbying for “deregulation” of unemployment. The committee approved their opinion for economic growth, which consequence would be unclear.

Other proposals were also trivial measures. One was to lowering the wall between hospital and pharmacy. To deregulate the separation, the committee proposed to ease a rule that required public road or fence between hospital and pharmacy. Required time period for registering new designated healthy food was considered to be shortened.

A worker in barber could not work as a beauty salon worker, or vice versa, because of regulation in license. The committee reviewed the regulation and concluded that both workers could to both jobs, only if all the workers in both shops had both licenses. In the field of agriculture, it recommended new taxation on abandoned land. This is a unique idea of introducing taxation for deregulation, because taxation is an extreme version of regulation.

All those measures are not based on fundamental review on regulations themselves, but minor discount of huge amount of regulations. This is a clear reflection of power structure of governance in Japan. In other words, regulations are tools for bureaucrats to rule the people. Politics and economy have not overcome that solid system. It is obvious that as long as political leaders leave this issue to a kind of consultative committee, real deregulation for sustainable economic growth and international credibility for Japan’s openness cannot be achieved.

火

Unrealistically Luxury Stadium

In an enthusiasm of winning the ticket of Tokyo Olympic in 2020, the government of Japan decided to renew National Stadium, which was built for the main stadium of the last Tokyo Olympic in 1964. Now, the renewal plan is becoming a beast of burden for a compact Olympic, in which budget for sport facilities is strictly limited. The cost for constructing New National Stadium is expanding unexpectedly. National government and Tokyo Metropolitan Government began to accuse each other.

Before winning the ticket, the committee for inviting Olympic held a competition of new stadium, in which a female Iranian architect won. Her design of the stadium was excellently groundbreaking with retractable roof over the field. One of the judges of the competition, Tadao Ando, a well-known Japanese architect, welcomed the originality and commented that new stadium would appeal Japan’s advance to the world with strong impact.

However, fiscal problem appeared as the committee calculated actual cost for the Olympic. Although the initial idea on the cost was ¥130 billion, it appeared that real value of the construction would be swelling as much as ¥300 billion. In addition to current price hike of raw materials along with declining value of Japanese yen, the design was too unrealistic to apply to the building with initial budget. It was after the competition when the committee members realized that she had been called “Queen of Unbuilt.”

The committee abandoned the retractable roof and field-side seats that was also retractable. The cost was estimated to be cut down to as little as ¥165 billion. But, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology asked Tokyo government to pay ¥50 billion for the construction. Surprised by abrupt offer of investment, Governor of Tokyo, Yo-ichi Masuzoe, rejected to pay for “a baseless plan.”

For the ticket of Olympic in 2016, each of national or Tokyo government accepted the payment for half of the whole cost, actually ¥100 billion, for new stadium. National government still expects Tokyo to pay ¥50 billion. Tokyoargues that it has no obligation for the payment, because the constructor has changed from Tokyo to the national for 2020.

It is fair to say that the quarrel stemmed from unreasonable invitation of Olympic. Prime Minister Shinzo Abe boldly asserted that contaminated water in Fukushima was under control, only resulting in spreading skepticism on Japan’s management of the nuclear accident. To buy votes for Tokyo, Japanproposed compact Olympic with unrealistic plan for the facility. It will be Japanese people who will pay for the baseless estimation made by national government.

Choking Yakuza Money

The government of Japan deals with every issue with a concept of distributing public money. To dismantle a criminal organization, law enforcement section newly introduced a concept of tax evasion. Local police arrested a gangster leader focusing on system with which the criminal organization sucked up money for their activities. People are looking at the effort of police to restore peace in cities and towns.

The Special Investigation Team of Fukuoka Prefectural Police Office arrested Satoru Nomura, the President of Kudo-kai that was registered as wide-area gangster organization. Nomura was suspected as hiding over \200 million of income, worth \88 million of tax evasion that had been collected from his members. The police supposes that he has accumulated \2.2 billion of illegal money.

According to the investigation of police, Nomura collects \240 million of money from branch organization every year. If the money had been stocked in his office, it would not be accused as tax evasion, because gangster organization is legally regarded as voluntary organization such as parent-teachers organization. Cooperating with National Tax Agency, Fukuoka Police Office found that a part of collected money had been privately used for the relatives of Nomura.

Yakuza organization require money for their activities like inauguration of new boss, funeral of victims in collision with rival organization or other ceremony to demonstrate its integrated power. To use collected money for those purposes cannot be blamed as illegal use of money. But, disturbing money flow is the key to paralyze gang organization. “We can wedge their system for maintaining the organization at last,” told an officer for Fukuoka Police Office.

Kudo-kai kept on let innocent people involved in their street fights. Last year, a member was arrested with suspicion of murdering former leader of fishery cooperative, who had not been cooperative with criminal activities of gang organization. Other members were consequently arrested with murder of a nurse or a dentist. To expand its interest in underground business, Kudo-kai reiterated murders of the people who stood up to exclude violence in civil society.

Nomura reportedly denied his suspect on tax evasion to the interview in police. “Our income is limited in management of car parking and I have been reporting it,” Nomura told to police officers. It is known that he had appropriately been paying tax for his own real estate in Kitakyushu city and a car parking in it.

If his detention extended, however, his organization may be weakened with absence of commander. Police organization laid unusual posture to support Fukuoka Police Office, designating this case as a pilot operation to dismantle other gang organization in all over Japan. One police officer called this case a fight we cannot be defeated.

New Voting Right for Young

House of Councillors passed a bill for vesting voting right on Japanese citizens in the age of eighteen or nineteen. Joining the people in twenty years old or older, they will be able to vote in the election of the House next year. It was the first time in these seventy years that the government of Japan expand people’s voting right. Nevertheless, some young people are reluctant to go voting, because they are not informed to the extent they can decide whom they should vote. Post-war Japanese society has not been flexible enough to expand democracy.

The motivation of legislators supporting the bill was not a pure demand of young voices in their politics. When they made a law for referendum on constitutional amendment, voting age was set as eighteen years old or more. Then, they found that voting age in election needed to be lowered to eighteen or more, because both referendum and election are the same in terms of participation to politics. In other words, lowering the age for election was for constitutional amendment.

Young agers do not understand such an adult business. While most high school students welcome new low for voting right, some are frustrated with it. “I don’t understand politics well,” “I’m not confident in my knowledge on candidates,” “I’m too young to take responsibility for my vote,” “I don’t want a vote at all,” were typical response from young people who were negative to go to vote.

This is a consequence of social education in Japan. In highly bureaucratic society like Japan, people have been left in a situation of informational hunger. “Let them not informed, but dependent” were a golden words for bureaucrats. As a result of such a top-down type governance, the people are not accustomed to think about politics by themselves. When they asked to discuss political issues, they sometimes appalled by responsibility as a democratic citizen.

Targeting the innocence among the civil society, political parties are active to scoop those new young voters. Liberal Democratic Party is planning to settle a sticker machine, Print Club, at the lobby of the party headquarters, which provides sticker with portrait of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. President of Democratic Party of Japan, Katsuya Okada, has been visiting high schools to sell his policy. Japan Communist Party has been discussing the issues related to young agers, including new security legislature that would send young people to battlefield or problem of “black firm” that forced hard labor with low wage.

Education of eligible voters is becoming a key concept for the government to raise the turnout of each election. But, the education must not be planting specific ideology to innocent people. Firstly, political leaders need to demonstrate how democracy is precious and worth participate in.

Coercive Allegience

Shinzo Abe administration put further pressure on public education. Minister of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, Hakubun Shimomura, made a speech to the presidents of national universities, in which he required to hoist national flag and sing the national anthem in the ceremonies of entrance or graduation. Because his request was legally baseless, most presidents are ignoring it. Historical revisionism of Abe is distorting public education, anyway.

Shimomura was careful not to be regarded as intervention to autonomy in universities. “Though it is left to voluntary decision of each school, I hope them to judge it in an appropriate manner,” told Shimomura on hoisting national flag and singing national anthem. His request was based on a statement of Abe in the discussion at the Diet in April, in which Abe demanded national universities to raise the flag and sing national anthem. The main reason was because national universities were administrated with tax money.

Article 23 of Constitution of Japan guarantees academic freedom. Furthermore, Article 19 determines that freedom of thought shall not be violated. Abe was inappropriate in asking national universities a specific ritual of showing allegiance to the nation. In the time of Imperial Japan, the government oppressed studies and speeches in universities. Academic freedom and autonomy in universities were strictly protected in post-war Japan with sincere regret on the past.

Introducing context of taxation was a fundamental threat to schools. With overwhelming decrease of students after baby-boomers had graduated, universities have been facing tough moments in school management. Shimomura reminded national universities of a fact that he would be able to control distribution of money. What Shimomura meant was that “I’m the boss, you guys know. I can cut the budget for researches, if you do not follow my instruction. Think twice.”

After the meeting, the presidents of national universities showed complicated response. “We will maintain current style next year and later. Our duty is to contribute to taxpayers through education and study, and we do not have to follow the request of national government,” told Takamitsu Sawa, President of Shiga University, where national flag was hoisted, but national anthem was not sung. Ryukyu University has never exercised both on them. Hajime Oshiro, President of Ryukyu University, expressed that he would suspend discussion on this issue in his school.

The ministry also required each national university to review the necessity of some academic divisions, such as liberal arts or educational course. It was based on a biased idea that universities should be more focused on natural science. Academic freedom reflects rich diversity of a society. Abe administration is oppressing university, repeatedly saying “Walk this way.”

Ending Evacuation Support

Prefectural government of Fukushima decided that it would terminate a policy to provide with houses for volunteer evacuees in severe accident of First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant at the end of March, 2017. For those who need a house outside of hometown, it will pay for a part of the rent. While the government emphasized the necessity for early return to hometown, it also focused on cutting cost for evacuees. But, the evacuees are frustrated with the policy, saying it is too early.

After the nuclear accident in First Fukushima Nuclear Power Plant, there appeared certain area in Fukushima, where people could not live, due to high radiation. Abiding by the order of national government, one hundred thousand people are still living in somewhere out of their hometown. In addition, there are people who left their town without any order of the government, escaping from bad effect of radiation. The Fukushima government calls them voluntary evacuees and has been paying for their rent. The estimated number of voluntary evacuees amounts to twenty-five thousands.

Main reason for ending rent payment for volunteer evacuees was the progress in building reconstruction public housing. About five thousand rooms will be build for the evacuees. Consulting with national government, Fukushima government realized that, along with progress in decontamination of residential area, the policy needed for urging evacuees to get back home. “It is difficult to maintain a policy of emergency rescue,” told the Governor of Fukushima, Masao Uchibori.

Volunteer evacuees have four options: moving to reconstruction public house, buying a house with compensation from Tokyo Electric Power Company, getting back to home or finding an alternative house somewhere else. Different from temporary houses, where most volunteer evacuees live, reconstruction public house requires the residents monthly rent. For those who lost their job or property, it is hard to pay for the rent. For those who are afraid of negative impact of remaining radiation, they need to make a hard choice whether they return to or abandon their hometown.

Mainichi Shimbun reported an example of a woman who evacuated from Fukushima with two little children, leaving her husband in Fukushima. She had to find part time job, while her husband could not send her money for evacuating life to pay for housing loan. The couple divorced after he refused her request to leave Fukushima. She suffered from alcoholic addiction with psychological pressure to raise her kids with scarce income. For her, finishing rent support would be a fatal damage for her life.

Both national government and local government need to understand the true situation of the evacuees. While Fukushima government expects more people coming back to their hometown, the policy may cause separation between who can get back and who cannot. It is possible that the go-home policy may turn out to be a homeless production policy.