Discussion at the Science Council of Japan Cabinet Committee Details of the debate

Discussion at the Science Council of Japan Cabinet Committee Details of the debate on October 7, 12:35

k10012651691_202010071221_202010071226.mp4

A debate was held during the closing examination of the Cabinet Committee of the House of Representatives held on the 7th over the fact that six candidates for membership of the Science Council of Japan were not appointed.

During the closing examination, both the ruling and opposition parties asked questions about the failure to appoint six candidates for the Science Council of Japan.

Ruling party question

Mr. Kentaro Sonoura of the Liberal Democratic Party asked, "I should explain to the public that this measure does not violate the Science Council of Japan law or academic freedom."

In response, Deputy Minister Mitsubayashi of the Cabinet Office said, "It was appointed by the Prime Minister of the appointed person based on the law, and it is not pointed out that it is a violation of the law. Also, it is an infringement of academic freedom that I have as an individual. I don't think it will be. "

Regarding the point that the position on security-related laws may have influenced the decision to appoint this time, Secretariat Otsuka of the Cabinet Office said, "Since it is related to human resources, I will refrain from details, but Prime Minister Suga also said that this appointment I know there was an explanation that the position on the bill was irrelevant. "

Opposition questions

Mr. Masato Imai of the Constitutional Democratic Party replied in 1983 that the government "recommended only in form", but in 1983, "it cannot be said that there is an obligation to appoint as recommended" within the government. Regarding the fact that the documents such as "Isn't it a change in interpretation?"

On the other hand, Deputy Minister Mitsubayashi said, "Given the idea that the right to dismiss the selection of civil servants is a national right, the prime minister who has the right to appoint does not have to appoint as recommended. When it became a system, it was based on this way of thinking, and it did not mean that we changed the way of thinking. "

In response to the request to explain the reason for not appointing, Prime Minister Otsuka said, "Prime Minister Suga, as the appointed person, will promote the activities of the Science Council of Japan from a comprehensive and fuzzy perspective. I made the appointment in accordance with the law. "

Opposition side "Government explanation is still insufficient"

Opposition parties such as the Constitutional Democratic Party said that the explanation of the government was still insufficient, and confirmed the policy of asking the government for a clear explanation by conducting interviews with former chairpersons of academic conferences and continuing to clarify the facts. did.

The Constitutional Democratic Party, the Communist Party, the Democratic Party for the People, and the Social Democratic Party have met in the Diet and are suspected of violating the Constitution, violating academic freedom about the failure to appoint six candidates for the Science Council of Japan. Nevertheless, they agreed that the government's explanation was still inadequate.

We also conducted interviews with former chairman Juichi Yamagiwa and former chairman Takashi Onishi, who were involved in the recommendation of the members, and continued to clarify the facts and asked the government for a clear explanation. I confirmed the policy to go.

The Constitutional Democratic Party's chairman of the Azumi National Assembly told reporters, "The problem this time is not that the budget of 1 billion yen is being spent on academic conferences, but what should be the distance between the academic world and politics. They are being asked. Unless there is a clear explanation as to why the six were removed, we will pursue them on a daily basis. "

Chief Cabinet Secretary "Does not infringe on academic freedom"

Chief Cabinet Secretary Kato said at a press conference in the morning, "Academic freedom stipulated in Article 23 of the Constitution is widely guaranteed to all citizens, especially to ensure that professors can freely conduct academic research at universities. I do not think that it will violate the academic freedom that the members of the academic conference have as individuals. "

In addition, regarding the document that was compiled within the government, he said, "For recommending more candidates than the appointee, it was necessary to legally organize the relationship between recommendation and appointment, and we followed it." It was.

On that basis, the government side at the House of Councilors Education Committee in 1983 said, "It is a recommendation system only for the form, and those who are recommended by the academic society will not refuse, we will appoint only the form as it is. Regarding the consistency with the answer, "Documents have been created based on past answers."