The Political Reform Betrayed in Japan

Japan conducted a series of political reform to facilitate “maturity and openness” in its democracy by modernizing party politics and promoting smooth change in government (power shift). Based on an optimistic and simple assumption that the two-party system was ideal for the sake, single-seat districts were introduced in the Lower House. To make “clean” politics, the law of public subsidies to political parties was enacted, whereas political contributions to individual politicians were strictly controlled.   

 

Three decades have passed since then and what we witness today is completely different from what we originally expected. The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), the natural governing party in Japan, is more powerful and centralized than before. No active movements towards the unification of opposition parties have taken place for the last decade since the disastrous end of the Democratic Party government. The electorate no longer seem to expect opposition parties to unify themselves as a governing party.   

 

The one-party predominant (“one and a half” party) system in the era of the 1955 Regime has changed, but not towards the two-party system. It is upgraded to the “one strong and many weak” party system (Ikkyo Tajaku). The LDP is now “modernized”; that is, more organized and centralized to the extent that plurality within the party is hardly seen, not to mention that power shift is unlikely to take place in the foreseeable future.  

 

The gap between expectation and reality is not totally accidental. It can be explained, to a considerable extent, by the effects of political institutions. It is asserted that the reformed electoral system of the Lower House prevents a convergence to the two-party system. Public subsidies to political parties encourage the proliferation of minor parties. In addition, the electoral system of the Upper House has critical effects over party reshuffling, given symmetrical cameralism in Japan. My talk ends with the conclusion that the political reform in Japan have brought about stagnancy in politics and hollowing out of democracy, instead of revitalization in politics and maturation of democracy.   Lunch and Refreshments provided.

 

Toshimitsu Shinkawa (Professor Hosei University, Professor Emeritus of Kyoto University)    Moderator: Ito Peng (Director, Centre for Global Social Policy, Professor, Department of Sociology, Professor Munk School of Global Affairs & Public Policy, University of Toronto) Organized by the Centre for the Study of Global Japan. Co-sponsored by the Centre for Global Social Policy, University of Toronto.