Non-confidence Resolution Rejected

The House of Representatives rejected the non-confidence resolution against the Cabinet led by Prime Minister Fumio Kishida on June 20. The resolution submitted by the Constitutional Democratic Party accused of the slush fund scandal as unprecedented case over political fund and of Kishida’s lack of leadership to investigate the overall structure of the false management. Although all the opposition parties, including Japan Innovation Party which voted yes to the LDP’s bill of revising Political Funds Control Act (PFCA), the resolution was dismissed by the majority of LDP and Komeito.

Non-confidence resolution is a power vested only on the Lower House based on Article 69 of the Constitution of Japan. If the House passes a non-confidence resolution, or rejects a confidence resolution, the Cabinet will resign en masse, unless the House is dissolved within ten days.

 

There are only four cabinets under current constitution that received non-confidence resolution passed the House: the Cabinet of Shigeru Yoshida in 1948 and 1953, of Masayoshi Ohira in 1980 and of Kiichi Miyazawa in 1993. In each of those cases, the House was dissolved and had a general election. Prime Minister’s usual countermeasure against non-confidence resolution is a snap election.

 

The resolution needs 50 signs of the house members to be submitted to the Speaker. The Chairman of Diet Affairs Committee of CDP, Jun Azumi, submitted the non-confidence resolution against Kishida Cabinet with other nine members of his party. 50 names of the lawmakers, mainly with CDP, were attached to it. Raising loopholes in the revised PFCA, the resolution denounced the bill as far less than political reform, attributing that insufficiency to irresponsibility of Kishida.

 

Non-confidence resolution is the biggest opportunity for the opposition parties to accuse current administration, being allowed once in a Diet session. If the resolution is rejected, it means that the House approved current Cabinet. The opposition parties thus deliberate whether the timing of submitting the resolution is the most effective to give political damage on the prime minister. The CDP submitted the resolution against Kishida right after the revised PFCA passed the Diet.

 

It was not surprising that the resolution was rejected, even how the CDP hoped some LDP lawmakers to vote yes and pass the House. The vote was made strictly along with party line. However, the opposition parties argued that Kishida was not fit for the leader in their debate before the voting. “The scandal of secret fund was very serious incident, which undermine the people’s confidence on politics. But Kishida does not recognize this seriousness,” said Kenta Izumi, the head of CDP, in the debate.

 

An LDP lawmaker, Kozaburo Nishime, defended his party in the debate as responsibly passed the revised PFCA bill. However, one of the LDP lawmakers, Jun Tsushima, criticized Kishida in a party meeting just before the plenary session of the Lower House for voting on the non-confidence resolution. “Should President Kishida need to be here to tell something to us? Why isn’t he here?” said Tsushima. The scene represented fundamental frustration in LDP against Kishida’s leadership.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Amendment of Local Autonomy Law

Request for Final Nuclear Disposal Site

Not A Royal Wedding