« 検察の懲戒請求 報道の自由が侵されかねない | トップページ | W杯出場決定 いざブラジルへ高まる期待 »

2013年6月 6日 (木)

憲法改正論議 公明党は現実路線で一歩前に

The Yomiuri Shimbun June 6, 2013
Komeito must take realistic tack on constitutional amendments
憲法改正論議 公明党は現実路線で一歩前に(6月5日付・読売社説)

Ahead of the House of Councillors election this summer, ruling and opposition parties are ramping up preparations, including those for their campaign pledges.
 参院選を控え、与野党は、公約の策定などの準備を加速させている。

Their positions on the nation’s basic law are being put under scrutiny through issues related to constitutional amendment.
 憲法改正問題を通じ、国家の基本に対する政党の姿勢が問われよう。

As a pledge concerning constitutional revision, New Komeito will likely advocate that adding new provisions it considers necessary--such as those regarding a human right to a decent and healthy environment--to the nation’s supreme law is the most realistic and reasonable approach.
 公明党は、参院選の公約として憲法改正に関しては、環境権など新たに必要な条文を憲法に加える「加憲」が、「最も現実的で妥当な方式」だと主張する方針だ。

Referring to Article 9 of the Constitution, Komeito will stipulate that the party will carefully discuss adding the existence of the Self-Defense Forces and how the SDF should contribute to the international community to the top law, while keeping the existing provisions of the article intact.
 9条にも言及し、現在の条項を残したまま自衛隊の存在や国際貢献の在り方を加えることを「慎重に検討する」と明記する。

The fact that there is no stipulation of the SDF in the Constitution has given rise to the unrealistic interpretation that the SDF are not military forces, and has hampered efforts to extensively formulate national security policy.
 憲法に自衛隊の規定がないことが「自衛隊は軍隊ではない」との現実離れした解釈を生み、安全保障政策の深まりを妨げてきた。

Articles 9 and 96

How will Komeito consider the status of the SDF while keeping Paragraph 2 of Article 9, which states, “land, sea and air forces, as well as other war potential, will never be maintained”? Although doubt remains over some of the specifics, Komeito can be commended for squarely facing up to amending Article 9.
 「陸海空軍その他の戦力は、これを保持しない」という9条2項をそのままにして、自衛隊をどう位置付けるのか。疑問は残るものの、公明党が9条改正に向き合った点は評価できる。

We hope Komeito will take further action to formulate provisions to be added to the Constitution.
 加憲の条文化へとさらに踏み込んでもらいたい。

Komeito is cautious about changing Article 96, which stipulates procedures for constitutional revision, ahead of other revisions. The party insists it is appropriate for this change to be discussed with other revisions. This is one reason why the Liberal Democratic Party and Komeito have failed to make common campaign pledges.
 公明党は、改正手続きを定めた96条について、他の改正内容とともに議論するのがふさわしいとして先行改正に慎重論を唱えた。この点は、自公両党が共通公約を作成できなかった要因でもある。

However, it is difficult for the Diet to propose an amendment to the Constitution to the public under the current requirement that the revision must be supported by at least two-thirds of lawmakers in both chambers. This hurdle is far too high compared with other countries. More discussions are needed on easing this requirement.
 だが、衆参各院の総議員の「3分の2以上」という発議要件では国会が憲法改正を国民に提案することは難しい。諸外国と比べてもハードルが高すぎる。要件緩和へ議論を重ねる必要がある。

Depending on the result of the upper house election, the relative importance of Komeito in discussions over constitutional amendment could grow. Komeito must coordinate its position with the LDP, which is trumpeting its own draft of constitutional revisions.
 参院選次第で、憲法改正論議における公明党の比重が高まろう。憲法改正草案を掲げる自民党との調整を進めなければならない。

DPJ’s stance as clear as mud

Meanwhile, the Democratic Party of Japan’s stance remains unclear. In its campaign pledge draft, the DPJ says it will promote “a constitutional dialogue” with the public, deepen discussions on what should be added and what should be changed, and craft the concept of a future-oriented constitution. This is tantamount to advocating nothing.
 一方、民主党の立場は依然、明確ではない。公約原案には「国民とともに『憲法対話』を進め、補うべき点、改めるべき点への議論を深め、未来志向の憲法を構想する」とある。これでは、何も主張していないに等しい。

Voters will be unable to make an informed judgment unless the DPJ concretely presents which clauses it wants to be reviewed and how. Discussions over many years have made it evident what should be added or what should be changed in the top law are the existence of the SDF, environmental rights, a provision concerning responses to an emergency, and the upper house’s excessive authority.
 どの条項をどう見直すのか、具体的に示さなければ有権者も判断しようがない。「補うべき点」や「改めるべき点」は、自衛隊の存在、環境権、緊急事態条項、強すぎる参院の権能など、長年の議論で既に明らかではないか。

The DPJ, which has not presented its own alternative plan, lashed out at the LDP draft, deriding it as “an anachronism” and “reactionary.”
 民主党は、自らの対案は示さずに、自民党案には「時代錯誤」「復古調」とかみついている。

During the campaign for the December House of Representatives election, the DPJ strategy was to fan the people’s anxiety of the LDP. In one extreme case, they raised the specter of whether the LDP might “turn the SDF into an organization that can launch intercontinental ballistic missiles.”
 昨年の衆院選でも、民主党は「自衛隊を大陸間弾道弾を飛ばすような組織にするのか」などと、極端な議論で自民党への不安をあおる選挙戦術が目立った。

The DPJ should not just slap labels on the LDP, but actually hold constructive debates on key matters.
 民主党は、“レッテル貼り”に走るのではなく、建設的な論戦を展開すべきである。

(From The Yomiuri Shimbun, June 5, 2013)
(2013年6月5日01時30分  読売新聞)

|

« 検察の懲戒請求 報道の自由が侵されかねない | トップページ | W杯出場決定 いざブラジルへ高まる期待 »

01-英字新聞(読売)」カテゴリの記事

コメント

コメントを書く



(ウェブ上には掲載しません)




« 検察の懲戒請求 報道の自由が侵されかねない | トップページ | W杯出場決定 いざブラジルへ高まる期待 »