In a trial in which it was disputed whether it was unconstitutional for Japanese living abroad to be unable to vote in the national examination of judges of the Supreme Court, an argument was held by the Supreme Court's large court, and the plaintiffs said, "Even though they are the same Japanese. It is strange that the right cannot be exercised. "
Five Japanese film directors and lawyers who could not vote in the national examination of judges of the Supreme Court five years ago because they lived abroad are dismissed from civil servants because they cannot vote abroad in the national examination. The government is suing for violating Article 15 of the Constitution, which stipulates the right to do so.
On the 20th, the Supreme Court, which is heard by all 15 judges, held an argument to hear both sides' claims, and four plaintiffs made statements.
Among them, a woman who lived in Brazil said, "It is strange that even though they are the same Japanese, they cannot perform a national examination that should be the rights of the people. I will. "
On the other hand, the government said, "The reason why we do not allow overseas voting is that the voting method is different from the election, and it is technically difficult to carry out the examination procedure in countries all over the world in a short period of time. There is a rational reason, and the Constitution It's not a violation. "
The first and second trials decided that it was unconstitutional to not allow overseas voting, and then the second trial pointed out that it would be illegal if they could not vote abroad at the next national examination.
The Supreme Court's decision is expected to be handed down by the summer, and it will be interesting to see what kind of constitutional decision will be made regarding the provisions of the current National Examination Law.
Plaintiffs "Don't make a disdainful judgment that the people are entrusted"
After an argument in the Supreme Court, the plaintiff and the defense team met.
Attorney Taiki Taniguchi, who is also one of the plaintiffs, said, "The state claims that the right to examine the people is lighter than the right to vote, but because it is entrusted to us, the judges of the Supreme Court are unconstitutional. The judgment is so powerful that even the Diet has the power to examine it. I do not want the judges of the Supreme Court to make judgments that disregard the grounds for their legitimacy. " I told you.
Kyoko Yoshida, a lawyer of the defense team, said, "Even if you think this decision is strange, Japanese people living overseas cannot participate in the examination unless the system changes. It is the judge of the Supreme Court who can change the current system. It's just that. "
National examination and overseas voting
"National examination" is a system in which the public examines whether or not a person is suitable as a judge of the Supreme Court, which shows the final conclusion of the judiciary, by voting, and is stipulated in the Constitution.
Judges who have never been examined after taking office,
or judges who have been examined for more than 10 years, can be stopped depending on the result.
It is held in conjunction with the House of Representatives election, and people over the age of 18 who have the right to vote can vote, but Japanese people living overseas are not allowed to vote.
On the other hand, regarding elections, an overseas voting system was established in 1998.
Initially, only proportional representatives in the lower house and parliamentary elections could vote, but in 2005, a lawsuit was filed to allow overseas voting in the constituencies, and in 2005, the Supreme Court's large court said, "Votes are limited to proportional representatives. The system violates the constitution that guarantees the right to vote. "
In response to this ruling, the Public Offices Election Law was amended, and from the 2007 Upper House election, it has become possible to vote abroad not only in proportional representation but also in constituencies.
The voting method differs between elections and national examinations.
In the election, the name of the candidate who wants to be elected is written on the ballot, but in the national examination, the name of the judge is printed on the ballot and an "x" is added above the name of the person who wants to stop.
For this reason, the national government says that it takes time to print papers for national examination, and there are technical problems in conducting it overseas, and no bill has been submitted to the Diet to allow overseas voting.