Vote Value Disparity and Judicial Review in Japan

Autores

  • Yuichiro Tsuji University of Tsukuba

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5380/rinc.v5i2.58989

Palavras-chave:

vote value disparity, judicial review, Japanese election, Iken-Jotai doctrine, Japanese Supreme Court

Resumo

In November 2015, the Japanese Supreme Court ruled that that there was disparity in the number of members in the House of Representatives following the general elections of December 2014. The plaintiff argued that the results of the 2014 elections for the House of Representatives were null and void. The value of the votes should be equal to the total number of voters, according to Articles 14 and 44 of the Japanese Constitution. The vote value disparity has created controversy through several cases since the Japanese Constitution was established.

Biografia do Autor

Yuichiro Tsuji, University of Tsukuba

Associate Professor at Graduate School of Humanities and Social Science (legal major) at the University of Tsukuba (Tsukuba, Japan). Juris Doctor at University of California, Berkeley Scholl of Law J.S.D Program. Member of Japanese Public Law Association, I-Con and Asian Law Institute. E-mail: gobear007@gmail.com.

Referências

ASHIBE, Nobuyoshi. Kenpo [Constitution]. 6. ed. Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 2015.

ASHIBE, Nobuyoshi. Kenpo to Gikaisei [Constitution and Parliamentary system]. Tokyo: Tokyo University Press, 1971.

BEER, Lawrence. Peace in Theory and Practice under Article 9 of Japan’s Constitution. Marquette Law Review, Milwaukee, vol. 81, n. 3, p. 815-830, mar./may1998.

HALEY, John. The Spirit Of Japanese Law. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2006.

HIGUCHI, Youichi. Hikaku Kenpo [Comparative Constitution] 3. ed. [s.l.]: Seirin Shoin, 1992.

KAMATA, Taisuke. Adjudication and the Governing Process; Political Questions and Legislative Discretion. In: LUNEY, Percy; TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki (Eds.). Japanese Constitutional Law. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press 1993.

KATO, Kazuhiko. Sangi-in no Isikika sareta Genzo Keisei. Tokyo Keizai Law Review, Tokyo, vol. 30, p. 199-?, 2016.

MAKI, John. Pacifism, Popular Sovereignty, and Human Rights. In: LUNEY, Percy; TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki (Eds.). Japanese Constitutional Law. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1993.

MATSUI, Shigenori. Kenpo [Constitution of Japan]. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 2007.

NONAKA, Toshihiko; NAKAMURA, Mutsuo; TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki; TAKAMI, Katsutoshi. Kenpo II [Constitution II]. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 2012.

RAMSEYER, Mark; RASMUSEN, Eric. Measuring Judicial Independence: the political economy of judging in Japan. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2003.

SATO, Isao. Pokeet Kenpo [Pocket Constitution]. vol. 1. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 1983.

SATO, Isao. Pokeet Kenpo [Pocket Constitution]. vol. 2. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 1984.

SATO, Koji. Kenpo [Constitution]. Tokyo: Seibundo, 2011.

SHISHIDO, Joji. Kenpo Kaishaku Ron No Ouyou To Tenkai [Development and application of theory of constitutional interpretation]. 2. ed. Tokyo: Nihonhyouronsha, 2014.

SOUICHI, Sasaki. Nihon Kenpou Youron [The main theory of Constitution]. 3. ed. [s.l.]: Kanasashi Houryudou, 1933.

TADANO, Masahito. The Right to vote and equality of value of vote. [s.l.]: Zenkoku Kenou Kenkyukai, 2015.

TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki. Contemporary Democracy in a Parliamentary System. In: LUNEY, Percy; TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki (Eds.). Japanese Constitutional Law. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1993.

TAKAHASHI, Kazyuki. Rikkenshugi To Nihonkokukenpo [Constitutionalism and the Constitution of Japan] Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 2013.

TANAKA, Hideo. A History of the Constitution of Japan of 1946. In: TANAKA, Hideo; SMITH, Malcolm (Eds.). The Japanese Legal System. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1976.

TATSUKICHI, Minobe. Kenpo Teiyou [Constitution]. 5. ed. Tokyo: Yuhikaku, 1932.

TOKUJI, Izumi. Watashi No Saikousaibansho Ron [My perspective on the Supreme Court]. [s.l.]: Nihonhyouronsha, 2013.

TOMATSU, Hidenori. Equal Protection of the Law. In: LUNEY, Percy; TAKAHASHI, Kazuyuki (Eds.). Japanese Constitutional Law. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press, 1993.

TSUJI, Yuichiro. Amendment of the Japanese Constitution― A Comparative Law Approach. Nanzan Review of American Studies, Aichi, vol. 37, p. 51-70, 2015.

TSUJI, Yuichiro. Article 9 and the History of Japan’s Judiciary: Examining Its Likeness to American and German Courts. Tsukuba Journal of Law and Politics, Tsukuba, vol. 68, p. 35-78, oct. 2016.

TSUJI, Yuichiro. Constitutional Court in Japan. Tsukuba Journal of Law and Politics, Tsukuba, vol. 66, p. 65-87, mar. 2016.

TSUJIMURA, Miyoko. Note sur la theone du "mandat imperatif". [s.l.]: Hitotsubashi Kenkyu, 1977.

TSUJIMURA, Miyoko. Simin Shuken no Kanousei [Possibility of citizen sovereignty]. Tokyo: Yushindo, 2002.

WATANABE, Yasuyuki. Rippousha niyoru Seido Keisei to sono Genkai. Hosei kenkyu or Journal of law and politics, Fukuoka, vol. 76, n. 3, 2009.

Downloads

Publicado

2018-05-01

Como Citar

TSUJI, Yuichiro. Vote Value Disparity and Judicial Review in Japan. Revista de Investigações Constitucionais, [S. l.], v. 5, n. 2, p. 57–90, 2018. DOI: 10.5380/rinc.v5i2.58989. Disponível em: https://revistas.ufpr.br/rinc/article/view/58989. Acesso em: 23 nov. 2024.

Edição

v. 5 n. 2 (2018): maio/agosto

Seção

Artigos originais

Licença

Autores que publicam nesta revista concordam com os seguintes termos:

  1. Autores mantém os direitos autorais e concedem à revista o direito de primeira publicação, com o trabalho simultaneamente licenciado sob a Creative Commons - Atribuição 4.0 Internacional que permite o compartilhamento do trabalho com reconhecimento da autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
  2. Autores têm autorização para assumir contratos adicionais separadamente, para distribuição não-exclusiva da versão do trabalho publicada nesta revista (ex.: publicar em repositório institucional ou como capítulo de livro), com reconhecimento de autoria e publicação inicial nesta revista.
  3. Autores têm permissão e são estimulados a publicar e distribuir seu trabalho online (ex.: em repositórios institucionais ou na sua página pessoal) a qualquer ponto antes ou durante o processo editorial, já que isso pode gerar alterações produtivas, bem como aumentar o impacto e a citação do trabalho publicado (Veja O Efeito do Acesso Livre).