Discussions among ruling coalition and opposition lawmakers on measures that would secure an adequate number of imperial family members to ensure a stable succession are entering the final stages.

The Constitution defines the emperor as the symbol of the state.

We believe it is desirable to conclude discussions in a direction that does not intentionally exclude female or matrilineal emperors in the future while continuing to place importance on the sense of values that is widely shared by the public and which flows throughout the Constitution.

RESPECT INDIVIDUAL CHOICE

In autumn 2024, an interim report was compiled by the top two officers of the Lower and Upper houses based on discussions held among all participating party members as well as the views of individuals who were questioned separately.

The report said “many views were expressed generally in favor” of not disturbing the imperial succession process that has continued until Prince Hisahito, who is second in line to the imperial throne. 

On a second point, the report said “a common understanding was in general obtained for moving in a direction of allowing as a pressing issue” female imperial family members to retain their status after marriage to a commoner.

On the third point of allowing patrilineal male offspring of the imperial line to be adopted, the report said “while many highly positive views were expressed, there were also opposing views.”

Four meetings of all participating Diet members have been held this year and the minutes of those gatherings were released by this month.

The general consensus of respecting individual choice regarding whether a female imperial family member decides to retain her status after marriage can be positively evaluated.

It is only natural to protect the freedom of making a personal decision whether to retain a status that has many constraints in terms of fundamental human rights, such as freedom of expression and occupational choice.

But imagination must also be exercised about the possibility that even in the case of personal choice, the individual might make such a decision while feeling both tangible and intangible pressure.

There is a need to create a system that sufficiently respects the will and the rights of the individual in question.

As Crown Prince Fumihito said at a news conference in 2024, imperial family members are “real live humans.”

We must never forget that they must be respected as individual human beings.

Regarding whether female imperial family members should be limited only to the children and grandchildren of an emperor or should be extended to also include great-grandchildren and later generations, the majority view was in favor of the latter.

DOUBTS REMAIN ABOUT ADOPTION PROPOSAL

However, opinion was divided over whether to give imperial family status to the spouse and children of female imperial family members.

The ruling Liberal Democratic Party was opposed because members argued for the need to maintain patrilineal sons for succession purposes. The LDP argued that the history and tradition of the imperial family of not allowing men who did not belong to the imperial line to become an imperial family member was “extremely serious.”

The opposition Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan pointed out that not giving imperial status to such males would allow them the freedom to head a political party, religious organization or for-profit company.

That would leave open the possibility of having a grave effect on the dignity and political neutrality as a female imperial family member.

We cannot consent to closing the door to giving imperial status.

Another proposal that has emerged is to hold meetings of the heads of the three branches of government and imperial family members to decide on each separate occasion whether to grant imperial status to the commoner male after marriage.

Past Asahi Shimbun editorials have touched upon the proposal for adopting as imperial family members the offspring of the sons of the 11 imperial families that were disbanded after World War II.

An editorial said the proposal “betrays a fixation on the idea that only males of the patrilineal lineage should be allowed to succeed to the throne and is unlikely to be widely understood or accepted by the public.”

Imperial House Law provisions prohibit adoption. A major reason is to avoid the confusion that has often arisen in history over the line of imperial succession and legitimacy of the emperor.

In this century, a panel of experts set up by then Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi said allowing disbanded family members to return to the imperial family would be “extremely difficult” because of problems that would arise from the viewpoints of understanding and support of the public, stability and tradition.

In recent years, constitutional law scholars have pointed to the possibility that the proposal could raise doubts about the constitutional ban against discrimination based on family origin.

In the latest round of discussions, the view was raised that the proposal could effectively lead to the creation of a hereditary status as an aristocratic family.

Wide-ranging understanding will not likely be obtained unless such fundamental doubts can be resolved.

DEEPEN DEBATE ON BASIC POINTS

What has emerged from the compilation of views is the removal from the discussions of allowing for female emperors as well as matrilineal emperors. That proposal was supported by the Koizumi experts’ panel and subsequent public opinion surveys have found strong support for it.

There have been eight female emperors in the past and all were patrilineal heirs. There is said to be no case of a matrilineal emperor.

Since Article 1 of the Constitution states that the emperor is “the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people,” it will likely be inappropriate that the gender inequality that society is struggling to overcome is reflected in the emperor and the system that supports him.

Rather than exclude the possibility of a female emperor or one from the maternal line, discussions should proceed while maintaining overall coherence. At the same time, there is a need to sufficiently keep in mind the rights of the individual who would be affected.

It will be difficult to achieve complete coherence because the Constitution contains heterogenous elements. In addition to defining the emperor as a symbol of the state, the Constitution also contains throughout it universal principles of mankind such as respect for the individual and equality under the law.

Debate must be deepened on such basic points as whether any new system might possibly expand the current incoherence, whether it is moving in a direction that is more in compliance for supporting the emperor as a symbol of unity of the people and whether the new system is in line with the sense of values of contemporary society that has been produced under the Constitution.

A previous Asahi Shimbun editorial said the LDP should not “push through its proposals on the strength of numbers without securing a broad public consensus.”

While once again confirming that stance, discussions should not be needlessly delayed, but the debate in the final stages must reach a conclusion that is convincing to a wide portion of the public.

--The Asahi Shimbun, May 28