Vote Value Disparity and Judicial Review in Japan

Autores/as

  • Yuichiro Tsuji University of Tsukuba

DOI:

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

Palabras clave:

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

Resumen

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.

Biografía del autor/a

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.

Citas

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.

Descargas

Publicado

2018-05-01

Cómo 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.

Número

Vol. 5 Núm. 2 (2018): mayo/agosto

Sección

Artículos originales

Licencia

Autores que publican en esta revista están de acuerdo con los siguientes términos:

  1. Autores mantienen los derechos autorales y conceden a la revista el derecho de primera publicación, con el trabajo simultáneamente licenciado bajo la Creative Commons - Atribución 4.0 Internacional que permite compartir el trabajo con reconocimiento de la autoría y publicación inicial en esta revista.
  2. Autores tienen autorización para asumir contratos adicionales separadamente, para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del trabajo publicada en esta revista (ej.: publicar en repositorio institucional o como capítulo de libro), con reconocimiento de autoría y publicación inicial en esta revista.
  3. Autores tienen permiso y son estimulados a publicar y difundir su trabajo online (ej.: en repositorios institucionales o en su página personal) a cualquier punto antes o durante el proceso editorial, ya que esto puede generar alteraciones productivas, así como aumentar el impacto y la citación del trabajo publicado (Véase El Efecto del Acceso Libre).