The Anatomy of a Conservative Court: Judicial Review in Japan

IF 2.2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW Texas Law Review Pub Date : 2012-10-10 DOI:10.4324/9781315089263-1
David S. Law
{"title":"The Anatomy of a Conservative Court: Judicial Review in Japan","authors":"David S. Law","doi":"10.4324/9781315089263-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The Supreme Court of Japan is widely and justifiably considered the most conservative constitutional court in the world. Drawing on interviews conducted in Japan with a variety of judges, officials, and scholars - including seven current and former members of the Supreme Court itself- this Article offers a and institutional account of why the Court has failed to take an active role in the enforcement of Japan 's postwar constitution. This account yields a number of insights into the relationship between judicial politics and electoral and the role of institutional design in mediating between the two. The fact that the Court is conservative is perhaps only to be expected given its longtime immersion in a conservative political environment: the center-right Democratic Party (LDP) has held power almost without interruption for half a century. Much of the LDP's influence over the Court is disguised, however, by the institutional design of the judiciary, which appears to enjoy a considerable degree of autonomy to manage its own affairs and even to decide who will serve on the Supreme Court. What the LDP has done is, in effect, to delegate political control of the judiciary to ideologically reliable agents within the judiciary itself- namely, the enormously powerful Chief Justice and his aides in the Court's administrative arm, the General Secretariat. Like the Chief Justice, the leaders of the General Secretariat are reliably orthodox jurists who have reached positions of power via a lifelong process of ideological vetting that all career judges must undergo. This group of judicial bureaucrats performs a wide range of sensitive activities ranging from the training and screening of new judges to the selection of the Court's law clerks, who are themselves elite career judges with both the ability and the inclination to oppose any liberal escapades on the part of the justices. The Japanese experience holds valuable lessons for students of judicial politics and institutional design. There is no plausible way of designing or structuring a court so as to insulate it entirely from political influence. The institutional characteristics of the court can, however, determine how responsive it will be to its political environment. An obviously relevant characteristic is the frequency with which political actors have the opportunity to shape the composition of the court. A less obvious, but no less relevant, characteristic is the extent to which power within the court is centralized or diffuse. The Supreme Court of Japan illustrates the importance of these characteristics: its organization and structure render it highly unlikely to depart from the wishes of the government for any meaningful period of time. The sheer number of seats on the Court, combined with a deliberate strategy of appointing justices close to mandatory retirement age, ensures a high degree of turnover that gives the government opportunities to adjust and correct the ideological direction of the Court on an ongoing basis. Similarly, the concentration of power in the hands of a single individual who is subject to replacement at relatively frequent intervals namely, the Chief Justice - obviates sustained and repeated efforts by the government to influence the direction of the Court. I. Introduction The Supreme Court of Japan (SCJ) has been described as the most conservative constitutional court in the world, and for good reason.1 One might characterize it as \"conservative\" in the sense of being so passive or cautious that it almost never challenges the government.2 Alternatively, or in addition, one might characterize it as \"conservative\" in the sense that it happens to share the ideological views and preferences of Japan's long-ruling conservative party, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP).3 What is clear, however, is that the label fits. Since its creation in 1947, the court known in Japanese as the Saiko Saibansho has struck down only eight statutes on constitutional grounds. …","PeriodicalId":47670,"journal":{"name":"Texas Law Review","volume":"87 1","pages":"1545"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2012-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"47","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Texas Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315089263-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 47

Abstract

The Supreme Court of Japan is widely and justifiably considered the most conservative constitutional court in the world. Drawing on interviews conducted in Japan with a variety of judges, officials, and scholars - including seven current and former members of the Supreme Court itself- this Article offers a and institutional account of why the Court has failed to take an active role in the enforcement of Japan 's postwar constitution. This account yields a number of insights into the relationship between judicial politics and electoral and the role of institutional design in mediating between the two. The fact that the Court is conservative is perhaps only to be expected given its longtime immersion in a conservative political environment: the center-right Democratic Party (LDP) has held power almost without interruption for half a century. Much of the LDP's influence over the Court is disguised, however, by the institutional design of the judiciary, which appears to enjoy a considerable degree of autonomy to manage its own affairs and even to decide who will serve on the Supreme Court. What the LDP has done is, in effect, to delegate political control of the judiciary to ideologically reliable agents within the judiciary itself- namely, the enormously powerful Chief Justice and his aides in the Court's administrative arm, the General Secretariat. Like the Chief Justice, the leaders of the General Secretariat are reliably orthodox jurists who have reached positions of power via a lifelong process of ideological vetting that all career judges must undergo. This group of judicial bureaucrats performs a wide range of sensitive activities ranging from the training and screening of new judges to the selection of the Court's law clerks, who are themselves elite career judges with both the ability and the inclination to oppose any liberal escapades on the part of the justices. The Japanese experience holds valuable lessons for students of judicial politics and institutional design. There is no plausible way of designing or structuring a court so as to insulate it entirely from political influence. The institutional characteristics of the court can, however, determine how responsive it will be to its political environment. An obviously relevant characteristic is the frequency with which political actors have the opportunity to shape the composition of the court. A less obvious, but no less relevant, characteristic is the extent to which power within the court is centralized or diffuse. The Supreme Court of Japan illustrates the importance of these characteristics: its organization and structure render it highly unlikely to depart from the wishes of the government for any meaningful period of time. The sheer number of seats on the Court, combined with a deliberate strategy of appointing justices close to mandatory retirement age, ensures a high degree of turnover that gives the government opportunities to adjust and correct the ideological direction of the Court on an ongoing basis. Similarly, the concentration of power in the hands of a single individual who is subject to replacement at relatively frequent intervals namely, the Chief Justice - obviates sustained and repeated efforts by the government to influence the direction of the Court. I. Introduction The Supreme Court of Japan (SCJ) has been described as the most conservative constitutional court in the world, and for good reason.1 One might characterize it as "conservative" in the sense of being so passive or cautious that it almost never challenges the government.2 Alternatively, or in addition, one might characterize it as "conservative" in the sense that it happens to share the ideological views and preferences of Japan's long-ruling conservative party, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP).3 What is clear, however, is that the label fits. Since its creation in 1947, the court known in Japanese as the Saiko Saibansho has struck down only eight statutes on constitutional grounds. …
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
保守法院的剖析:日本的司法审查
日本最高法院被广泛认为是世界上最保守的宪法法院。本文通过在日本采访多位法官、官员和学者(包括最高法院的七位现任和前任成员),从制度上解释了为什么最高法院未能在执行日本战后宪法方面发挥积极作用。这种解释对司法政治和选举之间的关系以及制度设计在两者之间的调解作用产生了一些见解。考虑到法院长期处于保守的政治环境中,最高法院是保守的这一事实或许是意料之中的:中间偏右的民主党(LDP)在半个世纪以来几乎没有中断过掌权。然而,自民党对法院的影响大多被司法机构的制度设计所掩盖,司法机构似乎享有相当程度的自主权,可以管理自己的事务,甚至可以决定谁将在最高法院任职。实际上,自民党所做的是将司法的政治控制权委托给司法机构内部意识形态上可靠的代理人——即权力极大的首席大法官及其在法院行政部门总秘书处的助手。与首席大法官一样,总秘书处的领导人也是可靠的正统法学家,他们是通过终身的意识形态审查过程获得权力的,所有职业法官都必须经历这一过程。这群司法官僚从事广泛的敏感活动,从培训和筛选新法官到挑选最高法院的法律助理,这些法律助理本身就是精英职业法官,他们既有能力也有意愿反对法官的任何自由越界行为。日本的经验为研究司法政治和制度设计的学生提供了宝贵的经验。没有一种合理的方法可以设计或构建一个法院,使其完全不受政治影响。然而,法院的体制特征可以决定它对其政治环境的反应程度。一个明显相关的特征是政治行为者经常有机会影响法院的组成。一个不太明显但同样重要的特征是法院内部权力集中或分散的程度。日本最高法院说明了这些特征的重要性:它的组织和结构使它在任何有意义的时期内都极不可能背离政府的意愿。最高法院席位的庞大数量,加上任命接近法定退休年龄的法官的深思熟虑的策略,确保了高更替率,使政府有机会不断调整和纠正最高法院的意识形态方向。同样,权力集中在一个人的手中,这个人也就是首席大法官,每隔一段相对频繁的时间就要更换,这就避免了政府持续和反复地努力影响法院的方向。日本最高法院(SCJ)被称为世界上最保守的宪法法院,这是有充分理由的人们可以把它描述为“保守”,因为它是如此被动或谨慎,几乎从不挑战政府另外,人们可以把它描述为“保守”,因为它恰好与日本长期执政的保守政党自由民主党(LDP)的意识形态观点和偏好相同然而,显而易见的是,这个标签是合适的。自1947年成立以来,日本最高法院(Saiko saibanshoo)仅以宪法为由否决了八项法规。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
6.20%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Texas Law Review is a national and international leader in legal scholarship. Texas Law Review is an independent journal, edited and published entirely by students at the University of Texas School of Law. Our seven issues per year contain articles by professors, judges, and practitioners; reviews of important recent books from recognized experts, essays, commentaries; and student written notes. Texas Law Review is currently the ninth most cited legal periodical in federal and state cases in the United States and the thirteenth most cited by legal journals.
期刊最新文献
Guarantor of Last Resort Demystifying Nationwide Injunctions Feminism and the Tournament Tracing Equity: Realizing and Allocating Value in Chapter 11 State Public-Law Litigation in an Age of Polarization
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1