Triennale politician remarks Constitutional scholar thought 12:29 on September 4th

One month after the exhibition on the theme of inconvenience of expression was canceled at the Aichi International Art Festival. At that time, Mayor Kawamura, Nagoya City, said, “No matter what you think, it's a thing that defeats the hearts of the Japanese people. On the other hand, Governor Omura of Aichi Prefecture, who decided to suspend, said safe operation was difficult, “The power of the public authority is“ this content is good and this is not good ”can be taken as censorship,” said Kawamura mayor I criticized the remarks. I asked Prof. Yoko Daido at Keio University Law School who is familiar with the freedom of expression to see how the Constitutional Scholars see these politicians.

What do you think? Politician remarks on the exhibition

First, Mr. Yokomichi, in response to the remarks of the mayor of Kawamura, denied that he said, “I don't think it would be free for the local governments to express their approval or disapproval because they made money.” Here's why.

"This time, the art executives called" Executive Committee ", which was established separately from the local government, made a plan, so even if a political exhibition was made on that occasion, that expression was accepted by Aichi Prefecture. It shouldn't be that you agree with or agree with it. "

On the other hand, I also pointed out that Governor Omura who decided to cancel.

“No one has been infringed as to whether the mayor of Kawamura has specifically violated freedom of expression. In fact, Governor Omura, who is the president of the art festival executive committee, decided to cancel the exhibition. In other words, the composition that the freedom of expression was constrained by the governor must not be overlooked.If a complaint comes, it must be said that it was unable to do so even though it was in a position to protect the writer. "

Administrative self-restraint

Mr. Yokomichi also expressed the following concerns about the local government's reluctance to exhibit works at public facilities in this situation.

“It is difficult to say that the constitutional rights have been infringed because it can be expressed without getting money from the government, and the place can be expressed by renting another facility. If we think that the significance of this is to create an environment where we can come into contact with the diverse values ​​necessary for the formation of personality, I think that the benefits of the society as a whole will be undermined by the government's self-restraint. ''

Administration and art

Based on that, he suggested that the British system would be helpful when considering the relationship between administration and art.

“I think the government needs to make money and leave the content to the art professionals. The British“ Arts Council ”system, which decides the subsidies of the arts organization independent of the administration, is helpful. I think it will be necessary to expand these efforts in the future. "

Mr. Yoko Yoko told us from the standpoint of a constitutional scholar that this issue posed to us.

What do you think? Please send feedback to: http: //WWW3.or. jp / newspost / form. html