Editorial
Rectifying Lower House vote disparity is an urgent task
The Tokyo High Court has declared the vote disparity in last year's House of Representatives election unconstitutional. The disparity resulted in votes in the least populated constituency weighing 2.3 times more than those in the most populated electoral district at the time of the election.
It is the third ruling that has declared the disparity in the value of votes at the time of the Aug. 30 general election, which brought about a transfer of power, to be unconstitutional, following rulings by the Osaka and Hiroshima high courts. The Diet is urged to take prompt action to rectify the disparity.
In its ruling on Wednesday, the Tokyo High Court pointed out that if the weight of a vote in the least populated constituency is two or more times heavier than a vote in the most populated district, it is highly likely to run counter to the Constitution. The view was shared by the Osaka and Hiroshima high courts.
The Supreme Court had maintained that vote disparity is constitutional if the maximum difference is less than three times. However, the trends of courts strictly interpreting equality of voting appear to be taking root. The latest ruling should be hailed as respecting the spirit of the Constitution that guarantees equality under law.
Moreover, the ruling raised questions about the system under which each of the 47 prefectures across the country is allotted one of the 300 available seats in single-seat constituencies and the remainder is divided up in proportion to population.
"If the system is the major cause of widening the maximum vote disparity to more than two times, it is difficult to recognize any reason for maintaining the system," the high court said. It also pointed out that leaving the situation would mean that the priority is placed on the policy of making allowances for depopulated areas over the constitutional guarantee of equality in voting.
However, the court also asserted that as an exception, the least populated prefecture should be permitted to receive at least one seat even if it is not entitled to do so when seats are allocated in proportion to population.
The ruling Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ) declared in its policy list, on which its manifesto for the general election was based, that it will seek to reform the way seats are allocated to single-seat districts in the Lower House. Both ruling and opposition parties are urged to discuss how to rectify the vote disparity and come up with a desirable solution.
High courts in many areas are trying similar lawsuits. In March, the Fukuoka and Nagoya high courts are expected to hand down rulings in these cases. After all the courts trying such lawsuits hand down their rulings, the Supreme Court is expected to hear them at its grand bench and make a final decision. If many high courts declare the vote disparity to be unconstitutional, it will certainly influence the final ruling to be handed down by the top court.
The allocation of seats in the Lower House constituencies has not been changed since 2002. In October, the government will conduct a large-scale census that is carried out every 10 years. Following the move, the Cabinet Office's panel on Lower House constituencies is expected to submit a draft plan to the prime minister to change the demarcation of the chamber's single-seat constituencies.
Efforts to rectify the allocation of seats in the Lower House have often been bogged down by the conflicting interests of political parties.
However, it would be inappropriate to call the next general election without rectifying the vote disparity. The Diet should speedily review the method of seat allocation, including whether to fundamentally reform the current system combining 300 seats in single-seat constituencies with 180 seats allocated to proportional representation blocs.
(Mainichi Japan) February 25, 2010