NO.114 The Japanese Supreme Court will judge Kamikaze as Constitutionality ・・・ Theme label: Japan's Supreme Court rulings that violate the constitution,Japanese Supreme Court will judge Kamikaze as Constitutionality


The Japanese Supreme Court ruled ignoring Article 97 of the Japanese Constitution. Article 97 of the Constitution of Japan guarantees the Japanese people basic human rights universal to all mankind that mankind has cultivated throughout history.
The Japanese Supreme Court defines the meaning of the words in the Japanese constitution.
Assuming Article 97 of the Japanese Constitution, the Japanese Supreme Court does not have the authority to define what basic human rights (basic human rights are like in Japan, human rights in English). So the Japanese Supreme Court ignores Article 97 of the Japanese Constitution.

In NHK's reception contract trial in December 2017, the Japanese Supreme Court ruled that the broadcasting law was constitutional. The Broadcasting Law stipulates that those who purchase televisions have an obligation to enter into a receiving contract with NHK.
The refusal of the receiving contract argued in trial that "the broadcasting law violates the Japanese constitution that guaranteed freedom of contract."

I read the sentence of the Japanese Supreme Court. In the judgment sentence, “The broadcasting law is constitutional” was judged on the basis of the broadcasting law itself.

About "the right to know." “The Japanese people have the right to know the information of the unbiased party,” the Japanese government decided. Unbiased information is information that is not biased to the claims of a particular individual or group. The Broadcasting Law stipulates that freedom of expression is the freedom to express unbiased information.
“The sound development of democracy is the development of democracy that is realized by the public judging the information of the unbiased party,” the broadcast law stipulates.
The Broadcasting Law stipulates that it is the responsibility of those involved in broadcasting to contribute to the development of this healthy democracy. In other words, those who are involved in broadcasting should only broadcast information on unbiased parties.

So who decides whether or not certain information is unbiased information? The government will be responsible for it.
NHK is a public broadcaster that was established to ensure the coverage of information on the unbiased party.

The public's right to know is the right to know NHK broadcasts. It is natural for a person to bear the cost of protecting his power.
And it is natural that the public should bear the cost of maintenance and operation of NHK fairly.
Therefore, the broadcasting law is constitutionality.

The Japanese Supreme Court decided this way.

The “freedom of contract” claimed by the refusal of receiving contracts is “freedom of contract” according to the basic human rights universal to humankind.

The basic human rights allowed to the Japanese people are the basic human rights permitted by the Japanese government.
This is clearly stated in the draft constitutional revision drafted by the Liberal Democratic Party during the opposition era.
Basic human rights universal to all mankind are not necessarily allowed to Japanese people.
This is the intention of the Japanese government.

In order for the Supreme Court to interpret the Constitution, the meaning of words in the Constitution must be clear.
Here, if we assume Article 97 of the Japanese Constitution, the definition of words described in the Constitution must be based on the basic human rights of universal humanity.

Furthermore, the Japanese Constitution must be interpreted based on the Charter of the United Nations.
The preface of the San Francisco Peace Treaty describes the historical significance of the establishment of the Japanese Constitution.
The establishment of the Constitution of Japan was a condition for the conclusion of the San Francisco Peace Treaty and a condition for Japan's accession to the United Nations.
The Japanese Constitution was created based on the Charter of the United Nations.
The enacted Japanese constitution was evaluated as a declaration of the intention of Japan to comply with the two principles of the Charter of the United Nations.
Peaceful resolution of the problem and guarantee of basic human rights.

It would be a matter of sovereignty for the Japanese government to deceive this declaration made in the past. However, there will be severe sanctions from the international community.
Power is justified violence.
The reason why power is justified is not because it follows God's law. It ’s because it ’s overwhelming power to control the weak without any objection.
The Japanese government rules the people with overwhelming violence.
However, the international community dominates the Japanese state with overwhelmingly justified violence. That's it.

The Japanese Supreme Court will try to define the words in the constitution by themselves.
To that end, the Japanese Supreme Court will ignore Article 97 of the Japanese Constitution. Regarding the statement in the preamble of the San Francisco Peace Treaty, the Japanese Supreme Court may not understand its meaning.
Japanese school education lacks logical thinking training. The Japanese Supreme Court may not be able to logically understand the preface of the San Francisco Peace Treaty.

Let us mention Articles 11, 12, and 13 of the Japanese Constitution.

Article 11 The citizens are not prevented from enjoying all basic human rights. The basic human rights that the Constitution guarantees to the people are given to the current and future citizens as permanent rights that cannot be violated.
Article 12 The freedom and rights that this constitution guarantees to the people shall be retained by the people's constant efforts. Also, the public should not abuse this and always bear the responsibility to use it for public welfare.
Article 13 All citizens are respected as individuals. As far as the public's right to life, freedom and happiness is pursued, it requires the greatest respect in legislation and other national politics, as long as it is not against public welfare.



The basic human rights in Article 11 are universal human rights if we assume Article 97.
However, if Article 97 is ignored, the basic human rights in Article 11 are the basic human rights that the government grants to the people.
If the Japanese government, or the Japanese Supreme Court, defines the word “public welfare” in these articles, the basic guarantee of human rights to the people is virtually denied.

The basic human rights universal to humanity are accompanied by the philosophy of public welfare. European and American societies have a volunteer tradition.
Europeans and Americans choose volunteer as their personal right.
If we assume Article 97 of the Japanese Constitution, this will be the case in Japan.

If the Japanese government specifically defines "public welfare", the Japanese government will set the obligations of the people.
Japanese citizens are responsible for realizing the "public welfare" established by the Japanese government (Article 12).
Japanese citizens are not allowed to claim rights that hinder the realization of “public welfare” established by the Japanese government (Article 13).

Suppose the Japanese government defines "public welfare" as a national interest. And suppose that the Japanese government has specifically defined the contents of national interest.
Japanese citizens are obligated to realize the national interests defined by the Japanese government.
Japanese citizens must prioritize this obligation over all basic human rights, including the right to survive.
Suppose that the Japanese government has defined, “It is the national interest to secure territory, airspace and territorial waters within the scope declared by the Japanese government.”
Japanese citizens are obliged to fight until they die to realize this national interest.
Withdrawing from the battlefield is not allowed. Withdrawing from the battlefield gives up the obligation to realize the national interest. Gyokusai (suicidal attack) is a duty of the Japanese people.

This is specifically documented in the draft constitutional revision of the Liberal Democratic Party.

And the Japanese government defines, “It is the happiness of the people to sacrifice their lives for the national interest.”
For the sake of this people's well-being, the Japanese government will legislate “an order that the government orders the people to commit suicide attacks such as kamikaze”.

This happened in reality during the Second Japanese Empire during World War II.

The Japanese Supreme Court will judge this law as Constitutionality.
The Japanese Supreme Court will judge Kamikaze as Constitutionality.




TOP Article

コメント

このブログの人気の投稿

No.012 Iran's President Rouhani has officially stated that it will enrich uranium beyond the provisions of the nuclear agreement. Participants in the nuclear agreement must be prepared to make decisions. Only the enrichment of uranium that allows nuclear weapons production must be blocked. ・・・ Theme label: A second Islamic state will be born in destroyed Iran Category label: Iran

NO.095 Will Iran choose nuclear weapons development? ・・・ Theme label: Dar al-Islam constructed by Saudi Aramco's 200 trillion yen money creation. Category label: Macroeconomics, Religious Sociology, Jihad, Iran

NO.048 Facebook's cryptocurrency Libra: Banknotes also evolved from gold deposit certificates initially issued by gold depositors. Banknotes that are currently in circulation around the world were also first deposit certificates issued by private businesses. , ・・・ Theme label: Asset owners. We propose a charitable enterprise for the Great Depression.What kind of world is GAFA looking at? Category label: Macroeconomics