NO.047 Why does the Japanese Supreme Court not properly understand the Constitution of Japan? I think their interpretation of the constitution is messy. Their interpretation is missing logic. Let me explain. This is probably due to the absence of logical thinking training in Japanese school education. ・・・ Theme label: The purpose of establishing the Japanese Constitution is described in the preamble of the SF Peace Treaty,Japanese Supreme Court will judge Kamikaze as Constitutionality


The Japanese Supreme Court does not properly understand the Japanese Constitution. First, let's mention this point in order.

In order for a person to interpret the law properly, it is necessary to properly understand the meaning of the words described in the law.
If the law contains, for example, the word "basic human rights", it is necessary to properly understand how the word "basic human rights" is defined.

When the law is enacted, the enactor should confirm the word definition in the law and then put that word in the law.
The enactor should envision the idea of ​​the law as a vision and adopt a suitable word for that vision.

Therefore, in order to interpret the law properly, it is necessary to investigate how the law was enacted.
This allows you to see the definition of the word adopted by the enactor.

In other words, in order to properly understand the Constitution of Japan, it is necessary to consider the process of establishing the Constitution of Japan.

The purpose of establishing the Constitution of Japan was to conclude the San Francisco Peace Treaty and to join Japan to the United Nations.

It is evaluated that the enacted Constitution of Japan is a declaration that Japan intends to comply with the principles of the United Nations Charter, and that it is a declaration of intention to make an effort to realize the purpose of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The conclusion of the peace treaty and Japan's accession to the United Nations were decided.

The current Constitution of Japan was enacted with the approval of GHQ under the guidance of MacArthur's GHQ.
The text of the Constitution of Japan should have been suitable for the purpose of MacArthur.
Needless to say, the purpose of MacArthur was the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty and Japan's accession to the United Nations.

A draft of the Constitution of Japan was made for this purpose. The draft Constitution of Japan was prepared with the preamble, the text of the United States Constitution as a model, and the United Nations charter as a starting point.

In other words, the interpretation of the Constitution of Japan should be conducted on the basis of the interpretation of the Charter of the United Nations.
The definition of each word in the Constitution of Japan should be sought based on the United Nations Charter.

The Japanese Supreme Court does not understand this at all. So, they define all the words in the Japanese Constitution and all the laws.

The Supreme Court of Japan defined "the right of the people to know" as "the right of the people to know NHK broadcasts." And it was ruled that "the broadcast law is constitutional."

The Supreme Court of Japan will define "the happiness of the people" as "the people devote their lives to the Japanese nation."

"The people have the right to commit suicide bombing to Japanese enemies in order to serve the Japanese nation. The government must do everything in order to realize this happiness for all the people." It will be done.
100 million balls crush. In other words, it is a one hundred million total happiness pursuit society. The former Japanese Empire was. ... and the LDP's previous draft constitutional amendment is so. The LDP has not yet withdrawn this draft.

An even more serious factor is the interpretation of "public welfare."

It is a philosophy that has been established in the history of humanity that individuals should not claim the right to interfere with public welfare.
The basic human rights of individuals are the principles established and established in the history of humanity, but the philosophy of public welfare is attached to the concept of basic human rights universal to all humanity.
It is a principle that the claim of an individual's basic human rights is guaranteed. However, it is the philosophy of public welfare that is intended to be restrained so that the claim of the right is not excessive.

Article 97 of the Constitution of Japan is a provision that guarantees the basic human rights universal to all humanity to the Japanese people.

Japan's Supreme Court has, until now, disregarded this Article 97 and seems to continue making decisions.

Let us assume that the Japanese Supreme Court has defined "public welfare" as "protecting national interests."

The Supreme Court of Japan will decide that the purpose of the government order to order the people to carry out suicide bombings is "public welfare."
At that time, an individual who has been issued this order by the government will not be allowed to deny the order, claiming the right to life.

Article 97 of the Constitution of Japan prohibits the Japanese Supreme Court from such definition of "public welfare."
So, Japan's Supreme Court will be judged to ignore Article 97.

People who did not understand the Constitution of Japan properly are not only the Supreme Court of Japan.
In Japan, no one has properly understood the Constitution of Japan for 70 years.
The origin of Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan is Article 1 paragraph 1 of the United Nations Charter. Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan stipulates that the war should be abandoned if the other party is a sovereign state seeking peace. The purpose of collective self-defense is to fight against terrorists. Therefore, the exercise of collective self-defense is not a violation of Article 9 of the Constitution of Japan.

For the past 70 years, all people in Japan have continued to misinterpret because they did not properly understand the Japanese Constitution. Therefore, the constitutional controversy over the past 70 years in Japan has been completely meaningless. So, what Japan needs to do now is "to correct mistakes from now on."
Just that's it.

Here, about the constitutional amendment. ... The text of the current Constitution of Japan was important for the purpose of MacArthur. If we revise the constitution, this premise will be broken.

It will lead to the abolition of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the invalidation of Japan's accession to the United Nations, and the abolition of the Japan-US Security Treaty.

It will be so. ... The purpose of the United States is to not repeat the tragedy of World War II. To that end, the United States has become a country that guarantees the basic human rights of its people, and has made it a country that resolves international issues in a peaceful manner, regardless of war.
He then signed the San Francisco Peace Treaty and joined Japan to the United Nations.
In order to realize these things, the United States has Japan enacted the Constitution of Japan.

Of course, revising the Constitution is the right of Japan. The US is aware of this as well.

The United States kept saying. "It has been a long time since the Constitution of Japan was enacted. During that time, it is Japan's responsibility not to revise it."
The United States used force on Japan until the end of the postwar period of World War II.
In other words, the Constitution of Japan was enacted, Japan was approved as an independent country, a peace treaty concluded, and Japan joined the United Nations.

After that, the United States has continued to say that it is a natural right of Japan that Japan revises the constitution and becomes a fascism nation again.

Lastly, for the last 70 years, why did not one person in Japan properly understand the Constitution of Japan? That there was no training to think logically in Japanese education I think that is the cause.

The method of logical thinking is the method of drawing conclusions by the method of logic, with the premise being regarded as correct.
The conclusions drawn are considered to be correct and are the premise of the following logic.
If you go back to logic, you will reach the very first premise.

The first premise is that although it is not proved to be correct, it is regarded as correct. In the case of mathematics, it is an axiom.

Those who have trained in logical thinking will become aware of problems as a starting point of logic.
When he tries to interpret the Japanese Constitution, he should be strongly interested in what the premise of the Japanese Constitution is.
As a result, he arrived at the historical background of the establishment of the Constitution of Japan, and I should have understood the extent I have stated.


TOP Article
Message to Lady M

コメント

このブログの人気の投稿

Link to Hatena Blog. Complement this blog・・・and, Japanese Version Letetter to White House at Google Blogger ,and My Linkedin

NO.227 Japanese parliamentarians are discussing amendments to the referendum law to amend the constitution.

NO.147 Dr. Naoki Komuro pointed out that Acute Anomie that erodes Japanese society after the Second World War About current symptoms. ・ ・ ・ Theme label: About analysis of Japanese society,Simple Anomie and Acute Anomie