Emergency Close Necessary?

Commission on the Constitution in House of Representatives held its first meeting in this ordinary session of the Diet on Thursday. Liberal Democratic Party argued that the Constitution would need a provision for extending the term of lawmakers in emergency such as social confusion caused by great earthquake. The opposite parties recognized the necessity of discussion on it, regardless their standpoints. LDP understood the move as a progress for constitutional amendment.

Article 54 of the Constitution determines that a general election of members of House of Representatives has to be held within 40 days from the date of dissolution and the Diet must be convoked within 30 days of the election. “When the House of Representatives is dissolved, the House of Councillors is closed at the same time. However, the Cabinet may in time of national emergency convoke the House of Councillors in emergency session,” adds the Constitution.

LDP is not satisfied with current provision for emergency. In Thursday meeting of Commission on the Constitution, Representative Yoko Kamikawa argued that the Constitution assumes emergency session of House of Councillors only for 70 days between dissolution and convocation of next session and useless for a great and prolonged disaster like East Japan Great Earthquake. Kamikawa also required discussion over whether concentration of power to Prime Minister in emergency would be needed.

Although it had been reluctant to discuss constitutional amendment, Democratic Party showed positive attitude for discussion on emergency clause. Former Chief Cabinet Secretary at the time of occurrence of East Japan Great Earthquake, Yukio Edano, realized necessity for considering extension of the term of lawmakers in emergency. But, he questioned legitimacy of lawmakers returning to their seat after dissolution. “To minimize that possibility, Prime Minister’s power for dissolution should be limited,” said Edano in the meeting.

The coalition partner of LDP, Komeito, argued that legislation for crisis control is already sufficient now and current Constitution would work for limiting power. Japan Communist Party strongly opposed emergency clause, recognizing it as encouraging state power for waging war or oppressing internal confusion. “Once we allow extension of terms of lawmakers, the administration will be able to survive as long as emergency is declared,” told JCP lawmaker, Seiken Akamine.

LDP is not making new provision for eternal life of Shinzo Abe administration, but simply wants to change the Constitution for the first time. The opposite parties do not have to join the discussion for the leading party’s political agenda.