In the House of Representatives election last October, the Supreme Court Grand Bench decided to hand down the judgment on the 25th of next month regarding the trial in which the so-called disparity of one vote was 2.08 times at the maximum, which violates the constitution. I was.

In the House of Representatives election last October, there was a disparity of up to 2.08 times in the value of one vote, and two groups of lawyers filed lawsuits in 16 courts nationwide to invalidate the election.



The rulings of the high courts and high court branches in various places were divided into


9 cases that were ``constitutional'' that did not violate the constitution, and


7 cases that were ``unconstitutional'', but they did not recognize the invalidation of the election.



The Grand Bench of the Supreme Court has decided to hand down judgments on these trials on the 25th of next month.



At the argument held on the 14th of this month, the group of lawyers argued, "In last year's election, 13.6 million citizens suffered an unbearable disadvantage that their individual voices did not reach the Diet equally."



On the other hand, the defendant's election management committee argued, ``Although the disparity has more than doubled, it cannot be said to be against the equality of voting value, given the shrinking situation.''



Last year's election was held with the same constituencies as the previous election, when the disparity narrowed to less than double for the first time since the introduction of the single-seat constituency system, but the disparity more than doubled again.



The focus will be on how the Supreme Court will evaluate this situation and the Diet's efforts to correct it.