|
On October 25, an explanation of proposed legal revisions relating to the establishment of a Japanese National Security Council (NSC) took place in the plenary session of the House of Representatives and was following by questions from representatives of the various parties.
Atsushi Oshima took to the floor on behalf of the DPJ caucus. He explained that the DPJ had recognized the need for an NSC from an early stage, commenting, "It is necessary to develop a comprehensive national security strategy by overcoming the barrier of the compartmentalized bureaucracy that has existed in the area of national security up until now, realizing political leadership, and integrating information regarding foreign policy, defence and the economy." He added, "The question is whether the current legislative proposal is really going to be effective, and whether it is able to properly fulfil its intended function." Oshima questioned Prime Minister Abe on the following points: (1) the problems with the current system and how the proposed legislation would address them, (2) whether it is possible to dispel concerns that this would just mean adding another meeting and another redundant organizational structure, (3) what is the meaning of legislating the meetings of nine ministers and four ministers, which have already been taking place as necessary, (4) the themes which would be addressed in the meeting of four ministers, (5) what would happen to the flow of information once the legislation had been enacted, and whether the meeting of nine ministers would be made redundant (6) whether there would there be a system in place so that the proposed national security agency would be able to analyse appropriate information from a variety of perspectives (7) what assurances could be given that the head of the national security agency would always provide information to the relevant government agencies, (8) the proposed division of labour between the head of the national security agency and the Deputy Chief Cabinet Secretary for Crisis Management, (9) the criteria for appointing and selecting the head of the national security agency (10) numbers of staff members to be employed by the agency and the criteria for selecting personnel (11) the role of the Special Advisor to the Prime Minister responsible for national security (12) the current state of Japan's intelligence agencies and what reforms are needed, (13) the link between this legislation and the proposal regarding the protection of special secrets, and how information disclosure is to be treated.
Oshima pointed out that "The National Security Council is a meeting forum,
but it is also an organization with staff members. Concerns have been
raised that this legislative proposal will simply increase the number of forums for meetings and involve setting up a new organization and expanding the existing organization, and will thus just end up being a redundant structure, with the compartmentalized organization of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Defense and so on simply being transported to the Prime Minister's Office."
Oshima went on to comment, "Won't this invite a situation wherein matters under discussion in the NSC will all be classified as secret under the pretext of protecting special secrets? Of course there are secrets which need to be protected for the sake of national security, but at the same time as a democratic nation we must ensure we fulfil our proper accountability to the Japanese people with regard to national security policy. It is important that matters discussed in the NSC are disclosed to the public as appropriate." He went on: "Minutes should be preserved for all meetings of the NSC, and these should be the subject of the law governing the control of public documents and the information disclosure law."
|
