Abstract: After Japan’s surrender in World War II, its political system faced many changes. With the help of the United States, Japan rewrote their Constitution, changing the way the Prime Minister was selected and voting eligibility in Japan. However, even with these changes, Japan’s electoral system would be reformed two more times due to the rise of one-party rule under the Liberal Democratic Party. However, further reform attempts may be needed in Japan’s future as one-party rule continues to be a feature of Japanese politics despite the exception of a three-year gap under the Democratic Party of Japan — another catchall party (2009-2012). Likewise, there may be reforms to consolidate the Liberal Democratic Party’s power as well. This article aims to explore the history of Japan’s electoral systems along with the reasons why they needed to be reformed. Additionally, it will briefly explain each system since World War II. Finally, this article will try to propose solutions to some of the problems in Japan’s current electoral system.
Keywords: Liberal Democratic Party, Japan, Japanese political system, post-World-War II Japan
Introduction
Throughout much of post-World War II Japan, Japan’s government has been directed by a single political party: the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP). Considered to be a catchall party, the Liberal Democratic Party has broad political cleavages in both rural and urban settings of Japan.[1] However, as this catchall party begins to revamp its nationalism under Prime Minister Abe Shinzo, the party is beginning to share fewer views with the voters in the country. This is evident in the LDP’s attempt to repeal Article 9 of the Constitution, which bans Japan from using war “as means of settling international disputes”, even though there is “strong support for retaining Article 9 among the Japanese people.”[2] As the Liberal Democratic Party maintains its undefeatable dominance, Japan’s political electoral system is failing to meet its original goal of a two-party system.[3] Despite its current failures, we should look back at the different electoral systems Japan has experienced pre-World War II before looking at the potential solutions to its dominant-party problem.
Japan’s Political Electoral System During and Before World War II
The Meiji Restoration in 1868 provided Japan with a bicameral political system based on the German-model of government.[4] With the implementation of the Meiji Constitution as a result of the Meiji Restoration efforts, Japan had “an elected Lower House (House of Representatives) and a peerage-based Upper House (House of Peers)”.[5] During this pre-World War II system, Prime Ministers would be chosen by “the Emperor and the Meiji genro”.[6] Initially, only male citizens who met certain tax qualifications were able to vote. However, in 1925, voting would be extended to all males above 25[7] (voting rights in Japan would continue to be expanded for women in 1945,[8] while voting age would be lowered in Japan over time with the most recent being in 2015 from 20 to 18.[9])
While this system was in place, there were major shifts in the government as political parties alternated control of the Lower House. However, these shifts resulted in constant transfers of power between these two parties, which would come to be called “Taisho Democracy”.[10] Although this system became more militant beginning in the 1930s, Japan’s surrender in World War II would immediately change the political structure of Japan’s government.[11]
After the Japanese surrender, the implementation of the 1947 Constitution brought many reforms to Japan’s political electoral system.[12] One of the major reforms would be that the Prime Minister would no longer be chosen by the Emperor and instead be chosen by the Diet – Japan’s bicameral legislature, which is “directly elected by voters”.[13] Additionally, as mentioned, women would be given the right to vote.[14] Even with these reforms, there was still strong multi-party competition in Japan with the “Liberal”, “Democrat”, and “Socialist” Parties.[15] However, this would change into a two-party system in 1955 once the Liberal and Democratic Parties consolidated to form the Liberal Democratic Party, while the “Left” and “Right” Socialists consolidated to form the Japan Socialist Party.[16]
Post-World War II Japan (“1955 System”)
The consolidation of the “Liberal” and “Democrat” Parties in Japan brought the rise of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)[17], which would usher in the constant one-party rule of the LDP for “38 consecutive years” in the House of Representatives.[18] This hold on Japan’s House of Representatives would be known as the “1955 system”.[19] Prior to and during this period, Japan had a multi-member, single non-transferable vote system (MMD-SNTV).[20] This meant that in each electoral district within Japan, citizens can elect multiple members to represent their district or prefecture in the Japanese Parliament. As mentioned, even though it appeared to be a healthy parliamentary system at first, the 1955 system later proved to be problematic with the rise of the LDP.
The LDP started to become a “catchall” party by appealing to more political cleavages, touting economic growth under their leadership. They, as well as the other parties, began letting multiple members compete in each district.[21] This continued to ensure the Liberal Democratic Party’s dominance in the Parliament. However, the style in campaigning shifted from a party-based election to a more candidate-based election.[22] More specifically, since multiple candidates were running under the LDP, it became difficult to determine which candidate to vote for. The competition within LDP caused candidates to make deals with party leaders in order to bring back more opportunities and benefits to the district, often referred to as “pork-barrel politics”.[23] As this became more prevalent in Japanese politics, more backroom deals were made, and eventually a lack of accountability within the Japanese government emerged, which surfaced in LDP bribery scandals.[24] Additionally, since there was essentially one-party rule in Japan, participation in Japanese politics had gradually decreased since most voters knew that the Liberal Democratic Party would remain in power regardless. Some even referred to the 1955 System as being a “1.5 party system”.[25] These reasons are why the 1994 electoral reforms were put into place and campaigned on.[26]
Japan’s Electoral System Today (1994 Electoral Reform)
After the 1993 election, the LDP was finally voted out of the majority in the House of Representatives.[27] This would pave the way to the 1994 electoral reform, where Japan would move from an MMD-SNTV system to a Mixed Member Majoritarian System (MMM).[28] In this MMM System, there would be a mix of single-member districts and a proportional party system.[29] This new proportional party system would be put in place so that citizens who identified with the other minor parties in Japan have an incentive to vote for these minor political parties. This, as some political scientists would hope, would create a two-party system in Japan so that the LDP would not be in power so consistently and would make elections in Japan more competitive.[30]
After the 1994 electoral reform, the Liberal Democratic Party seemed to go into decline. However, they never completely exited Japanese politics and would consistently be a part of coalition governments while they were not in power.[31] Additionally, the LDP’s former rival, the Japanese Socialist Party, consolidated with the LDP after the 1994 electoral reform, which ended any hopes of strong opposition to the LDP in political ideology.[32] Eventually, the LDP regained control of the House of Representatives (the Lower House of the Japanese Legislative Branch) and the House of Councillors (the Upper House of the Japanese Legislative Branch) and a one-party rule under the Liberal Democratic Party continued (until 2009-2012, but regained control in 2013).[33]
Although we did not see the intended goal of a two-party system within Japan, these reforms helped create a moment in Japanese politics that excited most people: the rise of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) in 2009. However, this excitement would be short-lived as a result of the government’s failure to effectively deal with the 2011 Tohoku earthquake and tsunami, and the LDP came back into power in the next election.[34]
Japan Today
Regarding the success of the 1994 reforms, its ultimate goals have not been fully realized yet, if at all, as the Japanese electorate has consistently voted for the Liberal Democratic Party to govern the country. Despite its failure to restore competition in the Japanese electoral system, the 1994 reform managed to eliminate the pork-barrel politics that had marred government accountability.[35]
Today, Japan’s government continues to go through changes. This is reflected in the number of seats in the Diet gradually decreasing along with the recent ushering of the new Reiwa era.[36] As of today, the LDP is trying to consolidate its own power by reforming the Japanese Diet through legislation. Specifically, the election reform bill in 2018 “add[ed] six seats to the Upper House” with four seats being under the proportional representation system and two being in the single-member district system. This, as opposing parties would argue, benefits the LDP by ensuring that incumbents hold onto power in the Diet.[37] With the LDP staying in power successively, there may be even more attempts to consolidate their power through uneven reforms.
Potential Solutions to Japan’s Electoral System
Japan’s electoral system today seems to have failed the Japanese electorate, evidenced by endemic low voter turnout. This, coupled with the decreasing popularity of the LDP, suggests that Japan’s electoral system needs to be reformed again to better reflect the views of the people while motivating voters to participate.[38] If Japan truly wants to reform its electoral system, Japan needs to address the LDP’s one-party rule.
In order to make reforms that will generate competition, it is necessary that the LDP be voted out of the majority government in order to prevent them from redesigning the electoral system to their advantage. This will allow reforms that weaken LDP’s dominance to be implemented and give other political parties a chance to configure a better system that would go beyond the 1994 reforms, a task which fell apart during those negotiations.[39]
Three changes come to mind when thinking about better political electoral systems. First, to avoid an unfair playing field for all parties, Japan can create an independent body to redraw maps to avoid malapportionment that favours the LDP. This, in turn, can potentially lower the disparity between urban and rural regions while ensuring the map is relatively fair for candidates in each seat.[40] Second, Japan could look towards other countries for potential solutions to their electoral problems. As one of the countries with a similar electoral system to Japan, one may find New Zealand’s electoral laws of interest. As such, Japan could implement stronger campaign finance laws since money politics remains an issue.[41] Third, Japan can adopt a party spending limit like that of New Zealand in order to even out the playing field for smaller parties in Japan. In addition, there could be private donation caps while public financing efforts are bolstered. This would prevent big donations from wealthy individuals and could help minor parties to catch up to the LDP’s fundraising advantage.
Conclusion
The LDP continues to be the dominant party over Japanese politics. As such, efforts to reform the Japanese political system remain somewhat unachievable unless they favour the LDP. In order to implement necessary reforms such that Japan’s political electoral system engages the voters and is more representative, the LDP may need to be ousted first.[42] Until that happens, the LDP will continue to maintain and potentially strengthen its one-party rule over Japan.
Bibliography
Babb, James. “Political ‘Science’ and the Study of Japanese Politics.” In The SAGE Handbook of Modern Japanese Studies, 351-366. 55 City Road, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2015. doi: 10.4135/9781473909908.n20.
Curtis, Gerald L. “Chapter 1: The Politics of Complacency.” In The Logic of Japanese Politics: Leaders, Institutions, and the Limits of Change, 25-64. New York, NY: Columbia University, 1999.
Edwards, Louise, and Roces, Mina, eds. Women’s Suffrage in Asia: Gender, Nationalism and Democracy. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2004. ProQuest Ebook Central.
Gallagher, Michael. “The Political Impact of Electoral System Change in Japan and New Zealand, 1996.” Party Politics 4, no. 2 (April 1998): 203–28. doi:10.1177/1354068898004002004.
Hijino, Ken Victor Leonard. “Japan’s Shrinking Democracy: Proposals for Reviving Local Assemblies.” Nippon.com. March 06, 2019. https://www.nippon.com/en/currents/d00410/japan’s-shrinking-democracy-proposals-for-reviving-local-assemblies.html.
“Japan’s Lower House Panel Clears Contentious LDP Election Reform Bill.” The Japan Times. July 17, 2018. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/07/17/national/politics-diplomacy/japans-lower-house-panel-clears-contentious-ldp-election-reform-bill/.
“Japan’s New Emperor Naruhito Ascends Chrysanthemum Throne.” South China Morning Post. May 01, 2019. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/3008361/japan-welcomes-emperor-naruhito-new-reiwa-era-begins.
Kingston, Jeff. “Chapter 7: Security and the Peace Constitution.” In Contemporary Japan: History, Politics and Social Change since the 1980s, 115-35. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013.
“Legislation to Lower Voting Age to 18 Enacted in Japan.” Jiji Press English News Service. Tokyo: JIJI Press America, Ltd., June 17, 2015. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1689508044/.
McElwain, Kenneth Mori. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” In Party System Institutionalization in Asia, by Allen Hicken, Erik Martinez Kuhonta and Meredith L. Weiss, 74-107. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
“Parties and Elections in Japan.” In The SAGE Handbook of Modern Japanese Studies, 367-391. 55 City Road, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2015. doi: 10.4135/9781473909908.n21.
Murakami, Hiroshi. “The Changing Party System in Japan 1993-2007: More Competition and Limited Convergence.” Ritsumeikan Law Review 26 (2009): 27-47.
Murphy, R. Taggart. “Why Japanese Voters Feel Hopeless.” The New York Times. December 12, 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/13/opinion/japans-political-sclerosis.html.
Schmidt, Carmen. “Social Cleavages, Voter Alignment, and Dealignment In Japan.” Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies 35, no. 2 (2003): 63-77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43294473.
Yang, Bojiang, and Huo Jiangang. “Historic Decline of LDP Politics in Japan.” Translated by Ma Zongshi. Contemporary International Relations 19, no. 5 (September/October 2009): 40-51.
[1] Carmen Schmidt. “Social Cleavages, Voter Alignment, and Dealignment In Japan.” Hitotsubashi Journal of Social Studies 35, no. 2 (2003): 63-77. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43294473.
[2] Jeff Kingston. “Chapter 7: Security and the Peace Constitution.” In Contemporary Japan: History, Politics and Social Change since the 1980s, 115-35. Chichester, West Sussex, U.K.: Wiley-Blackwell, 2013. 117, 121
[3] Hiroshi Murakami. “The Changing Party System in Japan 1993-2007: More Competition and Limited Convergence.” Ritsumeikan Law Review 26 (2009): 27-47.
[4] James Babb. “Political ‘Science’ and the Study of Japanese Politics.” In The SAGE Handbook of Modern Japanese Studies, 351-366. 55 City Road, London: SAGE Publications Ltd, 2015. 351.
[5] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Parties and Elections in Japan.” 368.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Ibid.
[8] Edwards, Louise, and Roces, Mina, eds. Women’s Suffrage in Asia: Gender, Nationalism and Democracy. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 2004. 114.
[9] “Legislation to Lower Voting Age to 18 Enacted in Japan.” Jiji Press English News Service. Tokyo: JIJI Press America, Ltd., June 17, 2015. http://search.proquest.com/docview/1689508044/.
[10] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Parties and Elections in Japan.” 368.
[11] Ibid.
[12] Ibid. ; Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” In Party System Institutionalization in Asia, by Allen Hicken, Erik Martinez Kuhonta and Meredith L. Weiss, 74-107. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 2015. 79.
[13] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Parties and Elections in Japan.” 368.
[14] Ibid.
[15] Ibid.
[16] Ibid. 368-369.
[17] Ibid. 369.
[18] Ibid. 367.
[19] Ibid. 369.
[20] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” 75.
[21] Ibid. 94.; Gerald L. Curtis. “Chapter 1: The Politics of Complacency.” In The Logic of Japanese Politics: Leaders, Institutions, and the Limits of Change, 25-64. New York, NY: Columbia University, 1999. 36.
[22] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” 94.
[23] Ibid. 83.
[24] Ibid. 80.
[25] Ibid. 90-96.
[26] Ibid. 97.
[27] Gerald L. Curtis. “Chapter 1: The Politics of Complacency.” 25.
[28] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” 75; 98; Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Parties and Elections in Japan.” 380.
[29] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Parties and Elections in Japan.” 380.
[30] Hiroshi Murakami. “The Changing Party System in Japan 1993-2007: More Competition and Limited Convergence.” Ritsumeikan Law Review 26 (2009): 27-47.
[31] Yang Bojiang and Huo Jiangang. “Historic Decline of LDP Politics in Japan.” Translated by Ma Zongshi. Contemporary International Relations 19, no. 5 (September/October 2009): 40-51. 40-41.
[32] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” 98.
[33] Ibid. 98-99.
[34] Ibid. 101.
[35] Ibid. 97.
[36] Ken Victor Leonard Hijino. “Japan’s Shrinking Democracy: Proposals for Reviving Local Assemblies.” Nippon.com. March 06, 2019. https://www.nippon.com/en/currents/d00410/japan’s-shrinking-democracy-proposals-for-reviving-local-assemblies.html.; “Japan’s New Emperor Naruhito Ascends Chrysanthemum Throne.” South China Morning Post. May 01, 2019. https://www.scmp.com/news/asia/east-asia/article/3008361/japan-welcomes-emperor-naruhito-new-reiwa-era-begins.
[37] “Japan’s Lower House Panel Clears Contentious LDP Election Reform Bill.” The Japan Times. July 17, 2018. https://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/2018/07/17/national/politics-diplomacy/japans-lower-house-panel-clears-contentious-ldp-election-reform-bill/.
[38] Murphy, R. Taggart. “Why Japanese Voters Feel Hopeless.” The New York Times. December 12, 2014. https://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/13/opinion/japans-political-sclerosis.html.; Gerald L. Curtis. “Chapter 1: The Politics of Complacency.” 34-35.
[39] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Parties and Elections in Japan.” 379-380.
[40] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” 91.
[41] Michael Gallagher. “The Political Impact of Electoral System Change in Japan and New Zealand, 1996.” Party Politics 4, no. 2 (April 1998): 203–28. 224-225.
[42] Kenneth Mori McElwain. “Chapter 4: Party System Institutionalization in Japan.” 98.
Leave a Reply