ニュース 2015/06/01 Hosono states “Legislation covering security incidents anywhere in the world is unnecessary” On June 1, DPJ Policy Research Committee Chair Goshi Hosono asked questions of government ministers during intensive deliberations held in a session of the Special Committee on the Legislation for Peace and Security of Japan and the International Community. 1. Government legislation would cover security incidents anywhere in the world At the start of his speech, Hosono stated that the DPJ had prepared a Territorial Security Act based on the party’s intention to remain “committed to an exclusively defense-orientated policy that is realistic in Japan’s vicinity, restrictive in far-off regions and active in humanitarian assistance.” He urged the government to “also consider legislation that would response to realistic problems nearer to Japan.” Hosono also pointed out that the government bills “make no distinction between [incidents] in Japan’s vicinity and those in far-off regions, and so legislation has become less clearly-defined.” For example, under the current Law Concerning Measures to Ensure the Peace and Security of Japan in Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan (hereafter the Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan Law), the concept of “situations in areas surrounding Japan” enables you to understand that the legislation is intended to deal with contingencies such as those on the Korean peninsula. However, in the new government proposal, the Law to Ensure Security for Situations that Will Have an Important Influence on Japan’s Peace and Security, which is the renamed and revised Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan Law, eliminates the concept of “situations in areas surrounding Japan”. Hosono pointed out that elimination of this concept, along with the plan to establish a new International Peace Support Law, which closely resembles the aforementioned Law to Ensure Security for Situations that Will Have an Important Influence on Japan’s Peace and Security, “makes it possible to apply the response made to potential situations arising from contingencies on the Korean Peninsula [envisaged under the Situations in Areas Surrounding Japan Law] to any security incidents arising anywhere in the world.” He asked, “The DPJ does not believe this is necessary, so why has the government decided that such legislation is needed?” 2. PM’s remark that “logistic support for ISIL clean-up operations is inconceivable” is misleading Furthermore, Hosono commented on Prime Minister Abe’s remark in a recent press conference that “logistic support for ISIL clean-up operations is inconceivable”. He pointed out, “I cannot detect the grounds for calling it ‘inconceivable’ by looking at the law. Wouldn’t [such operations] be legally possible?” Minister of Defense Gen Nakatani responded, “The decision as to whether [an operation] would fulfill the conditions of the law or not would be considered concretely case-by-case when the legislation is actually implemented.” This statement acknowledged that provision of logistic support for ISIL clean-up operations would be possible if it fulfilled the necessary conditions. 3. How should the state protect SDF troops Hosono went on to state that many serving Self-Defense Force troops had concerns about their duties in the event that the current legislative proposal was enacted. He asked, “Would cases of mistaken self-defense [where for example an SDF member shot a civilian in the belief that they were a terrorist] be prosecuted under Japanese domestic law as professional negligence resulting in death?” Regarding the widening scope for logistic support operations, Hosono said he had heard from SDF troops that “If they are given more important duties it will no longer be possible for the SDF to unilaterally decide to suspend operations or withdraw if combat occurs.” He asked for the Prime Minister Abe’s opinion, but Abe just repeated the response that “The SDF will establish which areas are safe and operate there” and “Naturally they will withdraw if an area becomes a combat zone.” 4. Many SDF troops hope to obtain “public understanding” Hosono went on to highlight the fact that many SDF troops hoped “to gain the support of the public through Diet debate…They would if possible like to avoid a situation where they would be sent overseas while public opinion is divided.” He quoted a senior SDF officer as saying “If it is not possible to obtain public understanding [now], then it would be better to spend a year discussing the matter thoroughly,” and urged the government to engage in thorough debate.