Referendum Act

The National Diet on Friday passed revised National Referendum Bill with multi-partisan support except Communists and Social Democrats. Although the Act had been unavailable because of some shortcomings in its provisions, the revised law enabled constitutional amendment with removal of contradictions. However, the revision was not legal adjustment, but a simple consensus of majority to make one step toward constitutional amendment.

The National Referendum Act was established in 2007 by first Shinzo Abe administration with brutal showdown by Liberal Democratic Party and New Komeito. But it had been recognized that the law was not available until “three projects” would be finished. They were A) concluding discussion over whether legal age and suffrage age should be lowered from twenty to eighteen as referendum age was determined to eighteen, B) to what extent campaign of public servants should be allowed, and C) whether referendum should be applied to other themes than constitutional amendment.

In the discussion at both Houses, referendum age would be lowered from twenty or older to eighteen or older four years after the law would be activated. Eight parties that submitted revised bill agreed on considering lowering suffrage age within two years. However, there is no guarantee for lowering legal full age. As the Constitution determines that “universal adult suffrage is guaranteed with regard to the election of public officials,” there may appear a contradiction when legal full age is twenty and suffrage age is eighteen.

In terms of campaign of public officials, the homework was not finished. Whether legal penalty would be applied to illegal campaign of public officials and whether local public officials should be treated as equal as national public officials was not concluded. Lawmakers saw no result in discussion over referendums in broad area. While there is an argument that national referendum is needed for resuming nuclear power generation, general referendum may erode significance of indirect democracy through elected representatives.

The revision of Referendum Law was also insufficient in the perspective of having no rule of lowest turnout for the referendum to be valid. There was an argument that constitutional amendment should not be made by only 10% or 20% of eligible voters.

The biggest reason why they passed bill was responsibility of lawmakers to fix problems of existing law. But as long as the law was made through irregular process, the needed to have discussed all things from the starting point, because there was no immediate necessity of the amendment.