With the passage of the law establishing the Judicial Reform
Council, the Council has been formed and is embarking upon its
deliberations. Against what background, has this
Council been devised ?
Rising public opinion concerning the need for comprehensive
discussions of the judicial system was the initial catalyst. An increasing
recognition of the issue among the general public, against a background of
societal changes continued the development. For many of those who needed
to resort to legal solutions, the Japanese trial process was too expensive
and time consuming and so is now no longer viewed as a practical solution
or remedy. The first generation critique came from the Japan Association of
Corporate Executives. Around the same time, the Administrative Reform
Council pointed out that true administrative reform must take place side by
side with judicial system reform. Subsequent to the above, a report
prepared by the Special Judicial Affairs Division of the LDP was issued
which contained an proposal to the government advocating the establishment
of a judicial reform council. Many other proposals have been presented since
then, including those from the!
Japanese Federation of Economic Organizations and the Japanese Federation
of Bar Associations. Taking all these into consideration, is my
understanding that the law to establish the present Council was motivated by
the rising concerns reflected by these various views and proposals.
|
What matters of substance are to be deliberated by the Judicial Reform Council?
Article 2 of the law which established the Council states:
"The law mandates an effort to investigate and contemplate relevant issues
regarding reform and improve the overall framework of the judicial system
which makes the law more useful and practical for the people, enable the
people to participate in judicial procedures and enhance the efficacy of the
judicial system itself". Section 2 of the same Article further states:
"The Council advises the Cabinet in accordance with the results of the
review and deliberation." This is the exact duty imposed on this Council.
Councils of this type normally work on rather narrowly defined
assignments given by cabinet officers in a form of direct question. Yet,
this Council is expected to cover very wide range of matters involving the
entire judicial framework, as the establishment law stipulates.
The entire judicial framework is an extremely broad area to deliberate as
the law describes "a judicial system which is useful to the people," which
is a very a loose theme.
|
Without concrete questions, how do you choose each issue to be considered?
Council members are supposed to come up with these through
their deliberations. The secretariat is not in a position to dictate the
flow of the tasks and deliberations. The Council may first go over the
proceedings in the Diet, through which the Council was established, to
identify points for investigation and debate. For instance, there were
questions from members of the Diet concerning whether they would "consider a
non-career judicial system, the jury system and public participation in judi
cial system" and Prime Minister and Minister of Justice answered "yes we
think they would." There is a supplemental resolution attached to the
establishment law introduced in both Upper House and Lower House Committees
on Judicial Affairs that mentions those items in more concrete language than
in the law itself. Section 4 of the lower House version calls for "the
Council to fully discuss such topics as enhancement of the quality and
quantity of members of the judiciary, a non-career!
judicial system that requires judges to have experience as lawyers and
public participation in the judicial process;" Section 2 of the Upper
House version has an equivalent expression.
|
|
What's New
Index
Next