A national examination of Supreme Court judges will be held at the same time as the House of Representatives election. “I want this to be an opportunity to get a feel for the judges’ thoughts and personalities,” emphasizes Yoshiki Yamaura, 78, who rose from being a “machiben” (town lawyer) to a Supreme Court judge 12 years ago. “Laws are dry provisions. How they are interpreted will largely reflect the judge’s outlook on life and values.” What remains in my heart is the postcard I received when I took the examination. (Chitomo Miyake)
National examinationA constitutional system in which the people examine whether Supreme Court justices are suitable for their duties. After their appointment, they will be subject to review during the first House of Representatives election. Voters write an “x” in the column of the judge they want to remove, and if they receive a majority of valid votes, they will be removed from office. If you do not write anything, it will be assumed that you have given your trust. If you enter anything other than “×” including “○”, it will be invalid. Once the person is trusted, he or she will not be subject to review for 10 years. No one has been removed from office in the last 25 elections since 1949.
◆My honest thoughts as Machiben
Mr. Yamaura set up an office in Tokyo and worked as a lawyer for about 30 years, and was appointed as a Supreme Court judge in March 2012. It was examined in December of the same year. Before the examination, each household will receive an examination bulletin containing information such as the judge’s background. Mr. Yamaura read past bulletins and felt something was wrong. “There is little meaning in writing ‘fairly.’ No judge would say, ‘I will do it unfairly.'”
Former Supreme Court Justice Yoshiki Yamaura giving an interview in Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo on the 7th (Photo by Kazuhiro Ichikawa)
I wanted to convey my thoughts rather than using conventional words. “Are citizens really protected by the law?” “It is important to focus all our efforts on listening to the cries of citizens who have no weapons to fight from the court records.” I have written my honest thoughts about Machiben in the official bulletin.
He listed “Mozart” as his hobby and added, “When I’m tired from work, I listen to Mozart and Mozart sits next to me and talks to me, which is strange.” “You’ll feel relieved if you know that he’s just an old guy you can find anywhere.”
After the review, a postcard addressed to Yamaura from a woman in Tokyo was delivered to the Supreme Court. “I was deeply moved by the text in the bulletin,” the person wrote. “A public bulletin is a love letter to the people. If you work hard at writing it, you will definitely get it across,” he said.
◆First constitutional ruling on selective separate surnames for married couples
Until his retirement in July 2016, he was involved in more than 14,000 court cases. One such example is the 2015 ruling, which was the first constitutional ruling on a provision in the Civil Code that does not allow couples to choose separate surnames.
Former Supreme Court Justice Yoshiki Yamaura giving an interview in Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo on the 7th (Photo by Kazuhiro Ichikawa)
It was heard by a total of 15 judges, and all three women and two men, including Mr. Yamaura, who were lawyers, said, “In many cases, only the wife bears the burden of a sense of loss of self, and the loss of personal dignity and the essential nature of both sexes.” It was deemed to be “unconstitutional,” as it cannot be said to be a system based on equality.”
However, a majority of 10 male judges concluded that the law was “constitutional,” stating, “The decision on which surname to use is left to the consultation of the husband and wife, and there is no formal inequality between men and women in the provision.” Ta.
◆It would be good if the public had an opportunity to ask questions.
The third round of litigation is currently being heard in two district courts, and the six judges subject to this review may one day join the case at the Supreme Court. The public has few opportunities to learn about the thoughts of judges who make decisions that have a major impact on the system itself.
Yamaura acknowledges the challenges of the current national screening process, saying, “It would be good if there was an opportunity for the public to ask questions, rather than just providing information one-sidedly.” Yamaura also spoke about the significance of the current national screening process. “I want to know what kind of personality and way of thinking the person who became a Supreme Court judge has, and then I can form an opinion whether I agree with that or whether it’s a little different. The national review is an opportunity to do that.”
