Abstract
This chapter examines the Diet’s issue clarification function regarding the International 2015 Peace Support Law and the Peace and Security Legislation Development Law. The two bills were deliberated together: approximately 216 h of lengthy deliberations. The media and the public focused heavily on constitutional violations, the opposition criticized the bills as war bills (using negative naming), and demonstrations were held at the Diet and in other parts of the country. The study revealed the political parties’ communication strategies, especially regarding the opposition parties’ focus during the parliamentary deliberations. It found that questioning differed according to partisanship. In response to the Security Law, the DPJ adopted a communication strategy to appeal to public opinion by positioning the contentious issue as constitutional. In contrast, by submitting a counterproposal the Japan Innovation Party did not oppose everything, but instead questioned individual issues and attempted to draw out compromises from the ruling party. However, given the time constraints of the session system it was too late to submit a counterproposal, so that the bill was not amended. Thus, the ruling coalition voted on the bill as originally proposed under the majority voting system, settling the issue.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
After World War II, Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution adopted a pacifist stance, denying the right to wage war. In 1954 the Self-Defense Forces were established; to guarantee civilian control, the Prime Minister was given supreme command and supervisory authority over the Self-Defense Forces.
- 2.
The supplementary resolution is a reminder to the government to enforce the law. However, it has no legal effect.
- 3.
The Assembly to Energize Japan was a six-member parliamentary faction that existed in the House of Councillors, but dissolved in December 2018.
- 4.
The Party for Future Generations, back then with two members in the House of Representatives and six members in the House of Councillors, changed its name to the Party for Japanese Kokoro but dissolved in November 2018.
- 5.
The New Renaissance Party had one member in the House of Representatives and two members in the House of Councillors at the time, but dissolved in July 2016.
- 6.
The Diet Law demands that the purpose of a particularly important bill be explained at the plenary session (Article 56, Paragraph 2 of the Diet Law); the bill cannot be examined by the committee until the purpose of the bill has been explained. The request for explanation of the bill’s purpose is used by opposition parties as a means of delaying deliberations, and this technique is commonly referred to as “hanging” (Oyama, 2004).
- 7.
Picketing is a strike tactic, referring to physically building an obstructive fence to keep members out of the chamber.
- 8.
Ox-walk is the act of a named member intentionally taking his/her time in moving to the voting booth when voting in the House. The name comes from the fact that they move slowly, like the gait of an ox.
- 9.
The Komei Party took a cautious stance on the overseas deployment of the Self-Defense Forces, demanding three conditions for their deployment: (1) legitimacy under international law, (2) public understanding and democratic control, and (3) security of the SDF personnel, with Komei Party Vice President Kazuo Kitagawa saying: “Our proposal has been adopted” (Yomiuri Shimbun, May 12, 2015).
- 10.
The Advisory Council on Security Laws is an advisory council to the Prime Minister on the reconstruction of the legal basis of security and the study of the relationship between the issue of Japan’s right to collective self-defense and the Japanese Constitution.
- 11.
In a cabinet decision on July 1, 2014, the government decided to change the interpretation of the Constitution to allow the limited exercise of the right of collective self-defense (Prime Minister’s Office, 2014).
- 12.
Matsuura (2017) considered security-related bills to be of subordinate importance to special bond bills in terms of urgency, indicating that the cabinet law proposers were screened out of the bills. The security bills discussed in this chapter were submitted under a unanimous parliament, and even if the urgency of the bills wasn’t particularly high, they were still considered to be of importance.
- 13.
JIP Member Yoichiro Aoyagi said, “I confirmed this at a lecture given by the relevant ministries last week. I asked bureaucrats if this guideline can be implemented under the current law. The officials of the ministries and government agencies clearly said that the new guidelines cannot be implemented without amending the security laws” (Minutes of the Special Committee on Peace and Security Legislation of Japan and the International Community, No. 6, June 1, 2015).
- 14.
However, Seiichiro Murakami, a member of the House of Representatives, expressed his opposition, saying that diplomatic efforts should be prioritized, and left the room just before the vote (Yomiuri Shimbun, May 13, 2015).
- 15.
The principle of the session’s non-continuation exists in the Diet (Article 68 of the Diet Law), and at the end of the session, bills that have not been deliberated on are abolished unless they are submitted for a continuing examination. The Diet’s session is supposed to last for 150 days (Article 10 of the Diet Law), and although it is possible to extend the session, the agenda is important in determining the success or failure of a bill.
- 16.
The Constitutional Commission on that day discussed the Constitution of Japan and basic legislation closely related to the Constitution of Japan, not focusing on the reinterpretation of the right of collective self-defense.
- 17.
The committee may hold public hearings on important matters (Article 51 of the National Diet Act), and once a public hearing is held, the committee is considered as ready to vote.
- 18.
On August 29, 2015, Osaka Mayor Toru Hashimoto and Osaka Governor Ichiro Matsui left the Japan Innovation Party to establish the Osaka Restoration Association, that was actually formed in November of the same year, with the party’s name being changed in August 2016 to the Japan Innovation Party.
- 19.
LDP members of H. C. are sometimes in conflict with LDP executives and can change the schedule indicated by members of the H.R. (Takenaka, 2010).
- 20.
A motion of no confidence against the chairperson is a pre-emptive motion, something that must be resolved before the bill can be deliberated.
- 21.
The opposition parties have power over the ruling parties when they are united against the ruling government, and the mass media and public opinion side with the opposition. The ruling party will be forced to take this into consideration when running the Diet because there is an agreement between the ruling and opposition parties not to deliberate or vote on a bill when only members of the ruling party are in favor (Iwai, 1988).
- 22.
Gray zone situations are cases in which foreign special forces etc. occupy remote islands disguised as fishermen or submarines, assumedly remaining in territorial waters (Yomiuri Shimbun Seijibu, 2015). However, this has not been revised in the Security laws.
- 23.
The Security Laws defined a critical influence situation, revising the existing Peripheral Situation Law, eliminating the geographical requirement that the situation must be considered peripheral.
- 24.
Here he checked whether voters were turning to the right, as the LDP government became more and more prolonged.
- 25.
It is generally acknowledged that the Diet in Japan is governed by the ruling parties, and that majority rule is guaranteed (Cox & McCubbins, 2005; Cox et al., 2000; Masuyama, 2001). Therefore, bills opposed by opposition parties might take longer to be passed, depending on the extent to which the ruling parties control the proceedings; the longer it takes to deliberate on a bill, the more other opposition parties converge on, and more strongly support, the main opposition party’s stance (Masuyama, 2001; Masuyama, 2015).
- 26.
Jacoby (2000), using 1992 U.S. election data (1992 CPS National Election Study), revealed the influence of differences in how Republicans and Democrats present issues. He showed that the Democrats who presented specific issues on government spending had a greater impact on individual voters’ attitudes than the Republicans who presented general issues.
References
Aday, S. (2006). The frame setting effects of news: An experimental test of advocacy versus objectivist frames. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 83(4), 767–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/107769900608300403
Blondel, J., Gillespie, P., Herman, V., Kaati P., & Leonard, R. (1970). Legislative behaviour: Some steps towards a cross-national measurement. Government and Opposition, 5, 67–85. https://www.jstor.org/stable/44482235
Cox, G., & McCubbins, M. (2005). Setting the agenda. Cambridge University Press.
Cox, G., Masuyama, M., & McCubbins, M. (2000). Agenda power in the Japanese house of representatives. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 1(1), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1468109900000116
Democratic Party of Japan. (2015). DPJ’s position on security laws. (in Japanese).
Fenno, R. F. (1973). Congressmen in committees. Little Brown.
Franklin, M., & Norton, P. (1993). Questions and members. In M. Franklin & P. Norton (Eds.), Parliamentary questions (pp. 108–113). Clarendon Press.
Hansson, S. (2015a). Calculated over communication: Strategic uses of prolixity, irrelevance, and repetition in administrative language. Journal of Pragmatics, 84, 172–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2015.05.014
Hansson, S. (2015b). Discursive strategies of blame avoidance in government: A framework for analysis. Discourse and Society, 26(3), 297–322. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926514564736
Iwai, T. (1988). Legislative process. Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. (in Japanese).
Jacoby, W. (2000). Issue framing and public opinion on government spending. American Journal of Political Science, 44(4), 750–767. https://doi.org/10.2307/2669279
Japan Innovation Party (2015). The Japan Innovation Party’s original plan for security laws. (in Japanese).
Kinoshita, K. (2015b). Bicameral theory: Administrative monitoring function and democracy. Shinzansha. (in Japanese).
Kutsunugi, K. (2015). The Diet debates on allowing the exercise of the right of collective self-defense: Changing the interpretation of the constitution and amending the contingency measures law. Legislation and Research, 372, 31–46. (in Japanese).
Kyodo News (2015, September 20). Insufficient deliberation of security laws: 79% Kyodo News poll. (in Japanese).
Laver, M., & Shepsle, K. (1996). Making and breaking governments: Cabinets and legislatures in parliamentary democracies. Cambridge University Press.
Laver, M., & Hunt, B. (1992). Policy and party competition. Routledge.
Lipinski, D. (2004). Congressional communication: Content and consequences. University of Michigan Press.
Masuyama, M. (2001). Parliamentary management and elections: A heteroskedastic probit model of legislative voting. Japanese Journal of Electoral Studies, 16, 55–66. https://doi.org/10.14854/jaes1986.16.55 (in Japanese)
Masuyama, M. (2015). Legislation and division of power. Tokyo Daigaku Shuppankai. (in Japanese).
Matsumoto, S., & Matsuo, A. (2010). Why do Japan’s lower house members speak in committees? Political parties, legislators, and electoral systems. Japanese Journal of Electoral Studies, 26(2), 84–103. https://doi.org/10.14854/jaes.26.2_84 (in Japanese)
Matsumoto, S. (2014). Development of a communication strategy by the congressional leadership and the 2012 congressional elections. In T. Yoshino & K. Maeshima (Eds.), Post-Obama American politics: The 2012 presidential election and the fragmented politics (pp. 125–158). Toshindo. (in Japanese).
Matsuura, J. (2017). The politics of a divided parliament: Anticipatory responses of the submitter of the cabinet law to the House of Councillors. Bokutakusha. (in Japanese).
Mayhew, D. (1974). Congress: The electoral connection. Yale University Press.
Ministry of Defense (2015). Defense of Japan: 2015 (Annual white paper). Nikkei Insatsu. (in Japanese).
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan (2015). Address by Prime Minister Shinzo Abe to a joint meeting of the U.S. congress. https://www.mofa.go.jp/na/na1/us/page4e_000241.html
Mochizuki, M. (1982). Managing and influencing the Japanese legislative process: The role of parties and the national Diet. Ph.D. Dissertation, Harvard University.
Musashi, K. (2005). The legislative process of the law concerning the special measures on humanitarian and reconstruction assistance in Iraq. Doshisha University Policy & Management Review, 7(1), 105–121. (in Japanese).
Nakauchi, Y., Yokoyama, A., & Kohiyama, T. (2015a). Parliamentary deliberations on the peace and security laws: A review of the four-month-long discussion on the peace and security laws. Legislation and Research, 372, 3–30. (in Japanese).
Nakauchi, Y., Yokoyama, A., & Kohiyama, T. (2015b). The peace and security enforcement bill and the international peace support bill: Outlines of two security-related bills submitted to the Diet. Legislation and Research, 366, 3–23. (in Japanese).
Oyama, R. (2004). Issues of proceedings in the diet. Hogaku Seminar, 599, 22–25. (in Japanese).
Prime Minister’s Office. (2014). Press conference by Prime Minister Abe on July 1, 2014.
Sasamoto, H., & Kuwayama, N. (2015). The Diet debates on logistical support legislation: Amendment to the law concerning security assurance in situations in the periphery and international peace support bills. Legislation and Research, 372, 47–58. (in Japanese).
Secretariat of the House of Representatives. (2015). Movements in the House of Representatives, 2015. (in Japanese).
Sellers, P. (2010). Cycles of spin: Strategic communication in the U.S. Congress. Cambridge University Press.
Sheafer, T. (2001). Charismatic skill and media legitimacy: An actor-centered approach to understanding the political communication competition. Communication Research, 28(6), 711–736. https://doi.org/10.1177/009365001028006001
Shirai, M. (2013). The Diet management law. Shinzansha. (in Japanese).
Takenaka, H. (2010). What is the House of Councillors 1947–2010. Chuo Koron Shinsha. (in Japanese).
Tani, K. (2004a). Dynamic analysis of the legislative process of emergency legislation (1). Meijo Law Review, 53(3), 83–185. (in Japanese).
Tani, K. (2004b). Dynamic analysis of the legislative process of emergency legislation (2). Meijo Law Review, 53(4), 99–172. (in Japanese).
Taniguchi, M. (2015). Left-right conflict in Japan (2003–2014): Based on politicians and voters survey. Leviathan, 57, 9–24. (in Japanese).
Tsukiyama, H. (2012). Multi-layer structure of policy positions: The constitutional revision issue in Japan. Public Choice Studies, 57, 46–58. https://doi.org/10.11228/pcs.2011.57_46 (in Japanese).
Yomiuri Shimbun Seijibu. (Ed.) (2015). Security laws: Changing security regime. Shinzansha. (in Japanese).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Kinoshita, K. (2023). Opposition Communication Strategies: Appealing to Public Opinion or Eliciting Compromise. In: Japanese Politicians’ Rhetorical and Indirect Speech. The Language of Politics. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4295-4_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4295-4_9
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-99-4294-7
Online ISBN: 978-981-99-4295-4
eBook Packages: Literature, Cultural and Media StudiesLiterature, Cultural and Media Studies (R0)