BY MASAHIRO SHIBATA

After a four-day governmental hiatus during which former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi was laid low by an abrupt debilitating stroke, Mr Yosihiro Mori, a former Secretary-General of the Liberal Democratic Party, took over a premiership as his successor. As a matter of fact, the succession was determined by some backroom manoeuvring carried out by a number of LDP executives. "Is it good for you, Mr Mori to succeed to the Prime Ministership?" This question indicated that they staged the election of the Prime Minister without the presence or consent of the citizens of Japan: it was as if they were treating the election of a successor as a drama played according to the customs of their function. Consequently, they have, from the beginning, been widespread doubts concerning the legitimacy of the Mori Cabinet.

This manner of electing a Prime Minister, done without public debate and behind closed doors, could lead to the selection of a politician who was not up to his job. In this instance, it has brought about a situation which is an unprecedented. Already, the Prime Minister's slip of the tongue has ridiculed the general opinions held by most of the country. When Prime Minister Mori addressed the Shinto Political League in a Tokyo hotel, he said "Japan is a divine country, with the Emperor at its center." Prime Minister Mori had already made one slip of the tongue after another, but this time, however, what the remark reveals is different and more serious than ever before.

Although he has subsequently said, "I repent for misleading many people, and sincerely apologize to the public," he has refused to retract his statement: "In the context of my speech I said nothing wrong." Yet even if, in this way, he seeks to exculpate himself, his statement goes explicitly against the Constitutional Principle that the sovereignty of the nation resides in its people. In responding to his remarks, a leading Korean newspaper, Toa-Nippo, gave prominent coverage to this statement, along with a colour photograph of Prime minister Mori, and wrote "his remarks remind us of the militaristic spirit of pre-war Japan." If we, the people of Japan, leave this remark unchallenged, it will simply fan the flames of distrust in Japan's politics that are already alight in the hearts of many Asian communities.

Mori's statement is utterly unforgivable, even though it is claimed that what he said was a slip of the tongue. But how can that be, when it is natural for a man in such a position to weigh his words, selecting them carefully, bearing in mind the weight and political influence of what he says, as a man who must take care of his country. And if it really was a slip of the tongue, why does he refuse to retract his "divine nation" statement? We can only assume that his remarks were no slip of the tongue nor some ill-considered lip service paid to his hosts, but were instead an expression of long-held personal political beliefs. Indeed, there seem to be a large number of people who wish to revive the days (a painful memory that most people wish to forget) when the Emperor stood at Japan's center. In this respect at least, Mori's "divine nation" statement has given rise to a crucial controversy about what our country is and how it should be governed.

How should we elect a Prime Minister? At present, political parties elect their leaders, the votes of the electorate support a particular political party of their choice, and the leader of the victorious party becomes the Prime Minister. As a reflection of the general will, there will be cases where the leader of the dominant political party will become a Prime Minister with whom the citizens can have a mutually understanding relationship. In the past this system has undoubtedly functioned well. But in the present instance, Mori's grave indiscretion leads us to assume that the present electoral system has reached a point of absolute exhaustion.

The President of the United States is also, in a sense, elected indirectly, since the party's candidates are first chosen by the party before being offered to the general electorate. Yet this type of election is not completely deferent from a direct election since the names of the presidential candidates are written on the ballot papers. Although we cannot assume that this system reflects the political ideas of the general electorate, there is, nevertheless, all the difference in the world between the American presidential system and what happened in Japan this time: the election behind closed doors of a Prime Minister that overrode Japan's constitutional priorities.

We can therefore assume that it is about time that the electorate should have the chance in a public election to elect for ourselves a political leader who is suited to lead the country. Japan is, without doubt, not a "divine nation": it is a "people nation." What we the electorate can do with the present electoral system is to make sure that we never fail to vote at a general election on 25 June so that we can express by doing so our own political ideas.