A close aide to former Prime Minister Shinzo Abe allegedly pressured the telecommunications ministry to effectively change the interpretation of a key provision of the law governing broadcasters.

While ministry bureaucrats resisted the pressure, the prime minister apparently did not stop the aide’s actions.

The allegations, if true, cannot be overlooked. Some people involved denied them. The issue should be investigated to clarify the facts.

Hiroyuki Konishi, a lawmaker of the opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan, on March 2 disclosed what he claimed to be a telecommunications ministry internal document obtained from a ministry official.

The document contains detailed records of exchanges between the ministry and Yosuke Isozaki, a former Upper House lawmaker, who served as a special adviser to Abe when he was prime minister.

The records describe how Isozaki repeatedly tried to pressure the ministry to effectively make changes in the government’s interpretation of a provision of the Broadcasting Law for four months under the Abe administration while saying there was no need to change it.

The law requires broadcasters to be politically fair and neutral in creating and editing programs.

The judgment on whether a broadcaster complies with this provision should be based on an assessment of its programs as a whole, not of one specific program, according to the government’s long-standing policy concerning the provision.

The stance was confirmed time and again by the government in its responses to related questions at the Diet.

It reflects the recognition that it is difficult to make an objective judgment on the political fairness of specific programs.

In 2015, however, Sanae Takaichi, who was the telecommunications minister at the time, gave an answer that was at odds with this official position in responding to a question at the Diet.

She argued that an assessment of whether a broadcaster was being politically neutral could be based on a single program.

In the following year, she said broadcasters could be ordered to shut down if their programs repeatedly breached the political fairness provision.

This is a dangerous idea that could imperil democratic politics since it could open the door to effective censorship of programs and suppression of free speech.

Takaichi was roundly criticized for her remarks. But it has been unclear why and how this serious change in the official stance was made.

The document obtained by Konishi indicates the possibility that Takaichi’s remarks were in line with the actions made by Isozaki and other officials of the Abe administration.

The records show Isozaki argued that the government needed to demonstrate its willingness to crack down on “outrageous programs,” naming specific TV programs.

Critics were gradually silenced. For example, one former telecommunications ministry bureaucrat who served as an aide to Abe had said such changes in the official interpretation of a law should be made through discussions at an advisory council or a revision to the law.

If the records are factual, they offer very important behind-the-scenes facts about how the abrupt policy change was made.

But Takeaki Matsumoto, the internal affairs minister,  only made noncommittal responses to the allegations at a March 3 news conference.

While not denying the existence of the document, he said repeatedly that the ministry is scrutinizing the document because there is doubt about the accuracy of the records. The Diet failed to conduct any substantial debate on the allegations.

Takaichi claimed in the Diet that it is a forged document. But Isozaki separately admitted that he discussed the interpretation of the law with the ministry. 

The ministry should clarify the facts as soon as possible.

Prime Minister Fumio Kishida is defaulting on his responsibility by declining to comment on the matter as if he had nothing to do with it.

The exchanges allegedly took place at the prime minister’s office.

How to interpret and enforce the Broadcasting Law has a significant impact on the information that citizens are given daily.

Kishida should take the leadership role in efforts to get to the bottom of the allegations and offer a convincing explanation to the public.

--The Asahi Shimbun, March 4