By Keiichi Inai

The Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law was enacted in the Lower House plenary session on January 11. This bill had been rejected in the Upper House plenary session that same morning. However, it was approved again in the Lower House plenary session based on the regulations of Article 59 of the constitution, and the bill was re-approved by more than two-thirds majority and was enacted. It was the first time in 57 years for a bill to be re-approved in a Lower House session. The purpose of the Anti-Terrorism Special Measures Law is to allow for on-ocean oil supply activities of the Maritime Self-Defense Forces to help fight terrorism. However, there were big problems in how to pass this bill.

During the reconsideration of this bill Ichiro Ozawa, the leader of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ), left the Lower House plenary session. It was announced that he left to make a campaign support speech in the Osaka gubernatorial election. At a press conference on the 16th, he stated, “I had previously promised to give a campaign speech for the Osaka gubernatorial election. Promises of an election should not be broken. The plenary session was mere number-crunching. The result was a foregone conclusion and I decided my priority as the party leader. I don't understand why there is any criticism.” This is very irresponsible for a Diet member. Though the result was predictable, the public must have expected a serious interpellation in the Diet. That a Diet member should leave during deliberations is a betrayal to the expectations of electors who cast votes.

After the bill was rejected in the Upper House plenary session, the ruling party reversed the result. Consequently, the law was enacted soon after, but there was no motion which took the result of the House of Councilors into consideration. Although enactment of the bill by re-approval in the House of Representatives met the regulations of the constitution, it was expected that there would be democratic discussions in the extraordinary Diet session where the LDP (Liberal Democratic Party) holds a majority in the House of Representatives and where the DPJ holds a majority in the House of Councilors. However, contrary to expectations, the ruling party brought this deliberation to a conclusion immediately.

It is usual for thorough discussions to be carried out in the Diet, but this time the lack of debate among Diet members became a problem. If this goes on, Diet deliberations will become a mere formality in future. The Diet is managed democratically by substantially debating and deliberating a bill satisfactorily. Though this was an extraordinary Diet session, it is essential that the ruling and opposition parties argue seriously beyond their factions and form agreements with each other. These problems should not happen again and Diet members should fulfill voters' expectations to hold meaningful discussions in the Diet. The public is watching their behavior carefully, so each Diet member must remember that they shoulder a great responsibility to act like statesmen.