Editorial

The Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) Political Reform Promotion Headquarters has decided to establish a party bylaw restricting hereditary succession of politicians, and plans to incorporate it into the party's manifesto for the next general election.

Even within the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), of which approximately one-third of its legislators are hereditary politicians, there has been a push from Yoshihide Suga, vice chairman of the party's election strategy committee, among others, to include restrictions on hereditary politicians. We welcome the effort to attract talented men and women to politics, and hope that voters will take a careful look at what this all means.

There are three "ban" that are said to be absolutely necessary to win an election: "jiban" (turf) or electoral base, "kanban" (trade sign) or high profile, and "kaban" (bag) or political funds. Hereditary politicians are able to inherit these three "ban" fairly easily. What's more, LDP personnel decisions have traditionally been based on the number of times a politician has been elected, placing hereditary politicians who have been elected to office from a young age at an advantage.

Since the LDP regained leadership of the government in 1996, all of Japan's LDP prime ministers have been hereditary politicians, with the exception of Yoshiro Mori. Moreover, the two most recent second-generation prime ministers stepped down about a year into their term, which resulted in a surge of criticism toward hereditary politicians. In one survey, nearly 70 percent of respondents said they believed hereditary politics to be problematic.

It is in response to such public sentiment that the DPJ has taken steps to restrict hereditary politics. Determining that of the abovementioned "ban," a legal argument could be built against "kaban," or the inheritance of political funds, specific measures targeting the practice have been in the works. It has heretofore not been uncommon to see politicians arrange for funds collected by their parents' fundraising organizations and other political organizations to be donated to their own. The DPJ, in an effort to put an end to this practice, is considering the mandatory dissolution of fundraising organizations and the donation of remaining funds to public service organizations when a politician dies or retires from public office.

It would be constitutionally impossible to prohibit the inheritance of the two remaining "ban," electoral power base and name visibility. The DPJ, as a countermeasure, has decided to ban DPJ candidates from running in the same electoral district as their parents previously had, and will state this new regulation in their manifesto. It appears that a "hereditary" relationship in this case will be defined as that among relatives three times or fewer removed.

Meanwhile, Suga, the LDP's leading proponent for restrictions on hereditary politicians, is enthusiastic. "If we can't show the public how far the LDP is willing to go, we won't be able to win the election," he says. Still, there are deep-seated objections, especially among hereditary politicians. Prime Minister Taro Aso has said that "it must be discussed further." It doesn't look like an agreement will be easily reached within the party.

Post World War II, people from various backgrounds set out for careers in politics in both the ruling and opposition parties. In addition to party politicians and former bureaucrats from the pre-war era, prominent journalists and former business executives joined the conservative predecessor parties of the LDP. But since the 1990s, we have seen a rise in hereditary politicians.

A collapse of the bubble economy and the subsequent recession has led us to place even more value on political leadership. The expansion of human resources must be undertaken with urgency. Placing a restriction on hereditary politics is unavoidable if we are to accumulate large numbers of capable politicians. The LDP must step up to make its own counterproposal, and make the issue a major point of debate in the coming election.