CDP Should Stop Blocking Imperial Succession Plan
このページを 日本語 で読む
Japan's parliament is working to ensure there are sufficient Imperial Family members for stable succession to the Chrysanthemum Throne. The speakers and vice speakers of the two houses of the Diet plan to compile a draft plan on succession specifically for this purpose. They will then submit the plan to each political party in the Diet.
The government must reach a legislative consensus based on the overriding principle of male-line succession to the throne. From there, it must move forward with revising the Imperial House Law. His Majesty the Emperor at the Imperial Palace, Ishibashi Room (pool photo)
Discussions have been proceeding in the Diet based on a report submitted by the government in 2022. That report stated that the flow of Imperial Succession from His Majesty the Emperor to Crown Prince Akishino and then to Prince Hisahito "must not be compromised."
It also included the following two proposals: Female members of the Imperial Family would retain their imperial status even after marriage. However, their spouses and children would not be considered members of the Imperial Family. Male descendants of former Imperial Family members could return to the Imperial Family through adoption or other means.
Eight major parties and parliamentary groups favor the contents of the government report. They include the Liberal Democratic Party, Komeito, Japan Innovation Party (Nippon Ishin no Kai), Democratic Party for the People, and the Yuushi no Kai (Volunteer Party). As soon as possible, we would like to see agreement on a finalized draft incorporating all its points. Prince and Princess Akishino with Prince Hisahito.
Point 2 of the report is the most important change. It would increase the number of male members of the Imperial Family with the right of succession and ensure a stable succession through the male line that would protect the foundations of Japan.
In April, the government announced that there were unmarried descendants in the male lineages of four former collateral imperial lines. This revelation has great significance. They are male descendants of Prince Kuni, Prince Higashikuni, Prince Kaya, and Prince Takeda.
These former branches of the Imperial House are offshoots of the Fushiminomiya family, whose heads were given the title of prince and princess by successive emperors over six centuries to protect the imperial line.
Male members of these former Imperial Families were eligible to inherit the throne until October 1947. Then, they were demoted to commoner status under the Occupation-era postwar Constitution, which still stands today.
Now, however, the continuity of the imperial line is under threat. The only viable solution is for male members of these collateral lines to be called on to assume the important duties of the Imperial Family as needed.
Repeated instances of succession based on the principle that the Imperial Throne is passed down through the male line have fostered legitimacy and prevented usurpation.
There is one cause for concern, however. That is the presence of Constitutional Democratic Party (CDP) leader Yoshihiko Noda and others who have been blocking the conclusion of an agreement on imperial succession.
The CDP's own written opinion only calls for "clarification of the issues" and does not go so far as to deny the conclusions of the government report. However, during discussions in the Diet, Noda disagreed with the contents of the government report. He has now become a leading figure in opposing it. But, in doing so, he has gone too far. The Emperor and Empress, Princess Aiko, Prince and Princess Akishino, and other members of the Imperial Family attend a garden party at Akasaka Gyoen in Motoakasaka, Tokyo, on April 23rd, 2024. (©Sankei by Takumi Kamoshida)
Furthermore, Noda and people like him appear to want to recognize the spouses and children of female members of the Imperial Family as full members of the Imperial House. That should not happen.
It would be an unprecedented change in the scope of the Imperial Family. Moreover, it would inevitably result in matrilineal succession to the throne. That would constitute a dangerous "Trojan horse" that could end Japan's imperial line, which has consistently passed down through the male line.
Hopefully, the CDP will stop its current machinations. They contradict the respect for history and tradition espoused in CDP's own report. Instead, we hope Noda and his party will move toward cooperation with the eight parties and parliamentary groups.
Author: Editorial Board, The Sankei Shimbun
このページを 日本語 で読む
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Global News
19 hours ago
- Global News
Trump's tariffs on Canada, world to stay in place during case, court rules
A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs will remain in place while a case is heard — extending an emergency stay granted after a lower court found the devastating duties unlawful. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found 'a stay is warranted under the circumstances.' It provides a temporary victory for the Trump administration as it hits its first legal barriers for realigning global trade. 'The Trump administration is legally using the powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address our country's national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking,' said White House spokesman Kush Desai in an emailed statement Tuesday. 'The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' stay order is a welcome development, and we look forward to ultimately prevailing in court.' Story continues below advertisement The U.S. Court of International Trade last month said Trump does not have the authority to wield tariffs on nearly every country through the use of the International Economic Emergency Powers Act of 1977. The act, usually referred to by the acronym IEEPA, is a national security statute that gives the U.S. president authority to control economic transactions after declaring an emergency. The ruling from the three-judge panel at the New York-based federal court in May said 'any interpretation of IEEPA that delegates unlimited tariff authority is unconstitutional.' It said 'the challenged tariff orders will be vacated,' representing a nationwide injunction against any further imposition of the duties. The Trump administration quickly was granted an emergency motion, essentially freezing the decision by the trade court that blocked the so-called 'Liberation Day' and fentanyl-related tariffs. The appeals court upheld that stay but noted the need for an expedited hearing, saying 'these cases present issues of exceptional importance warranting expedited en banc consideration.' A proposed schedule says arguments are expected in court by July 31. That means that countries will continue to be hit by those duties, for now. 5:32 Economist says counter-tariffs on the United States would hurt Canada George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin called it an 'unfortunate decision.' Somin, along with the Liberty Justice Center, represents five American small businesses pushing against the tariffs. Story continues below advertisement He noted that the court did go out of its way to indicate this is not a ruling on the merits, and ordered an expedited schedule for consideration of the case. Get daily National news Get the day's top news, political, economic, and current affairs headlines, delivered to your inbox once a day. Sign up for daily National newsletter Sign Up By providing your email address, you have read and agree to Global News' Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy 'We have a strong case, and I remain guardedly optimistic that the appellate court will ultimately see that the president's claim of virtually unlimited power to impose tariffs is blatantly illegal — which is what every court to have considered the issue so far has concluded,' Somin said in an email to The Canadian Press. Stock markets have been in turmoil and supply chains have been upended as Trump used unprecedented presidential power to enact his tariffs. Up until Trump's return to the White House, IEEPA had never been used by a president to impose tariffs. Trump hit Canada with economywide duties in March after he declared an emergency at the northern border related to the flow of fentanyl. He partially paused levies a few days later for imports that comply with the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement on trade. U.S. government data shows a minuscule volume of fentanyl is seized at the northern border. Trump took his trade war to the world in April with duties on nearly every country saying America's trade deficits amounted to a national emergency. The president walked back the most devastating duties a few hours later but left a 10 per cent universal tariff in place for most countries. Story continues below advertisement Trump said the 90-day pause would give countries time to negotiate a deal. The president said if countries didn't comply he would simply set tariff rates himself. 2:41 U.S. trade court 'brazenly abused' judicial powers to block Trump tariffs, WH says White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt has said that the Supreme Court should 'put an end to this' and called the lower court's decision 'judicial overreach.' The appeal ruling will consider two different cases that were pushing against Trump's tariffs. One included the five American small businesses against Trump's worldwide tariffs, and the other stemmed from 12 states arguing against both the 'Liberation Day' duties and the fentanyl-related tariffs. At least seven lawsuits are challenging the tariffs. Lawyers for the businesses say IEEPA does not mention tariffs and the U.S. Constitution gives power over taxes and tariffs to Congress. They say Trump is misusing the statute. Story continues below advertisement Lawyers for Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, Oregon and Vermont argued that tariffs make U.S. trade policy dependent on Trump's whims. Thirty-three senators also filed an amicus brief — a legal submission from a group that's not party to the action — in the case, saying the duties would cause harm to small- and medium-sized businesses while also grabbing powers that should be assigned to Congress. 'Small businesses do not have cash-on-hand or capital reserves to pay the increased tariffs, nor can they quickly adapt to them by modifying supply chains,' it said. 'If they cannot pass on the tariff costs to consumers — which would create additional harms for… constituents — many face letting employees go or filing for bankruptcy. Even a few weeks of additional tariffs means small businesses will suffer irreparable harm.' Canada is also being hit with tariffs on steel, aluminum and automobiles. Trump used different powers under the Trade Expansion Act of 1962 to enact those duties.
Winnipeg Free Press
a day ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
In the news today: Trump's tariffs remain in effect, Canadians critical of Israel
Here is a roundup of stories from The Canadian Press designed to bring you up to speed… Trump's tariffs to stay in effect amid appeal A federal appeals court agreed on Tuesday that U.S. President Donald Trump's sweeping global tariffs will remain in place while a case is heard — extending an emergency stay granted after a lower court found the devastating duties unlawful. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found 'a stay is warranted under the circumstances.' It provides a temporary victory for the Trump administration as it hits its first legal barriers for realigning global trade. 'The Trump administration is legally using the powers granted to the executive branch by the Constitution and Congress to address our country's national emergencies of persistent goods trade deficits and drug trafficking,' said White House spokesman Kush Desai in an emailed statement Tuesday. 'The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals' stay order is a welcome development, and we look forward to ultimately prevailing in court.' Poll suggests Canadians critical of Israel A new poll suggests that nearly half of Canadians believe Israel is committing genocide in Gaza almost two years after the current conflict began. In a survey conducted last weekend, the polling firm Leger asked Canadians and Americans a series of questions about the conflict in the Gaza Strip. The polling comes as the federal government is under pressure to take concrete steps to condemn Israel's actions in Gaza and the West Bank. Leger asked respondents whether they 'agree or disagree that Israel is committing genocide in the Gaza Strip' based on how they 'define what constitutes a genocide.' Feds look to boost weak summer jobs market The federal government is moving to shore up a historically weak summer job market for students — even as one economist argues tough employment prospects for young people suggest broader softness in the job market. Statistics Canada shone a light on the difficult employment prospects for students heading back to school this fall in its May jobs report last Friday. Roughly one in five returning students aged 15 to 24 was unemployed in May, the agency said. The last time the jobless rate for students was this high outside the pandemic was in May 2009. Also on Friday, the federal government announced an expansion of the Canada Summer Jobs program, which offers wage subsidies to businesses hiring young people for seasonal work. Concern in Canada after U.S. vaccine panel fired Canadian doctors and scientists say Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s firing of an immunization advisory committee south of the border is worrisome. On Monday, the U.S. health and human services secretary — a longtime anti-vaccine advocate — said he will appoint new members to the scientific group that advises the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention about vaccination. Angela Rasmussen, a virologist at the University of Saskatchewan, said Tuesday that the move will foster more false anti-vaccine beliefs, not only in the U.S. but also in Canada. 'It creates a culture in which anti-vaxx beliefs are more accepted and challenged a lot less. And also it creates an environment where there's an alternative to an evidence-based recommendation framework,' she said. N.S. miners strike a century ago still resonates During Nova Scotia's storied 300-year history of coal mining, one deadly riot in 1925 proved to be pivotal for workers' rights in Canada. One hundred years ago today, William Davis — a 37-year-old Cape Breton coal miner and father of nine — was shot to death by a special constable hired by the British Empire Steel Corporation (BESCO) — a monopoly mine owner that had repeatedly turned to violence to end strikes over poor wages and unsafe working conditions. 'William Davis's story highlights the many sacrifices that those unionized workers made when they stood up against oppression,' says Danny Cavanaugh, president of the 70,000-member Nova Scotia Federation of Labour. 'It serves as a reminder of a historic struggle that workers faced to secure their rights.' Davis's death on the outskirts of New Waterford, N.S., commemorated every year in Nova Scotia on June 11, was the painful culmination of a long series of strikes and chaotic skirmishes. CRTC holds hearing on internet choice Canada's telecommunications regulator is expected to hear today from major providers and consumer advocacy groups at a hearing on shopping for internet services. Wednesday marks Day 2 of the four-day hearing, which is part of a CRTC consultation launched in December on how to help consumers shop for home internet plans following complaints it was difficult to compare their options. The regulator is considering a requirement for providers to display relevant information — such as price and speed — through a standardized label, similar to nutrition labels on food products that contain serving size and calorie data. The Canadian Telecommunications Association industry group, along with Telus Corp., Bell Canada and internet accessibility advocacy group OpenMedia are scheduled to present today. — This report by The Canadian Press was first published June 11, 2025
Winnipeg Free Press
a day ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Lawyers for Kilmar Abrego Garcia say Trump administration's actions left ‘stain' on Constitution
Lawyers for Kilmar Abrego Garcia are accusing President Donald Trump's administration of pretending for weeks to be powerless to bring him back to the United States from El Salvador, despite orders from a federal judge and the Supreme Court to facilitate his return. Abrego Garcia's attorneys made the allegation in a court filing shortly after the Maryland construction worker was flown to Tennessee on Friday to face federal human smuggling charges. '(T)he Government has always had the ability to return Abrego Garcia, but it has simply refused to do so,' the attorneys wrote, arguing that the administration has 'engaged in an elaborate, all-of-government effort to defy court orders, deny due process, and disparage Abrego Garcia.' The attorneys said the lawsuit over his mistaken deportation has not concluded in a Maryland federal court. 'The executive branch's wanton disregard for the judicial branch has left a stain on the Constitution,' the attorneys wrote. 'If there is to be any hope of removing that stain, it must start by shining a light on the improper actions of the Government in this tragic affair and imposing meaningful remedies.' Abrego Garcia's attorneys made that argument in response to a filing by the Trump administration to halt the lawsuit's proceedings because he's back in the U.S. U.S. attorneys asked for an immediate stay after U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi announced the charges in Tennessee. The attorneys wrote that the government complied with the Maryland federal court's order to return Abrego Garcia. The U.S. intends to file a motion to dismiss the lawsuit. In a court filing on Tuesday, the Trump administration pushed back against the accusations of Abrego Garcia's lawyers, describing them as baseless, desperate and disappointing. 'But the proof is in the pudding — Defendants have returned Abrego Garcia to the United States just as they were ordered to do,' the U.S. attorneys wrote. 'None of Plaintiffs' hyperbolic arguments change that or justify further proceedings in this matter.' U.S. officials said Abrego Garcia was deported because of a 2019 accusation from local police in Maryland that he was an MS-13 gang member. Abrego Garcia has denied the allegation and was never charged with a crime, his attorneys said. Abrego Garcia's deportation violated a U.S. immigration judge's order in 2019 that shielded him from expulsion to his native country. The immigration judge had determined that Abrego Garcia faced likely persecution by a local Salvadoran gang that had terrorized his family. Abrego Garcia's American wife sued over his deportation. U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis ordered his return on April 4. The Supreme Court ruled on April 10 that the administration must work to bring him back. Arguments ensued over the next several weeks about whether the Trump administration was following those orders or not. Meanwhile, Trump said publicly that he could return Abrego Garcia to the U.S. with a call to El Salvador's president. The federal judge in Maryland ordered U.S. attorneys to submit documents and testimony to show what the government had done to follow her orders. The Trump administration claimed that much of that information is protected under the state secrets privilege. The judge has not ruled on that matter.
