Human Rights and Judiciary(2016)

International symposium, Human rights and the role of the judiciary

September, 2016.

Yuichiro Tsuji, Associate professor, University of Tsukuba

The University of Tsukuba is pleased to announce an international symposium on “Human rights and the role of the judiciary” to be held on 10 and 11 November, 2016.

A constitution is the basic law of a government. Human dignity is a universal principle, within as well as beyond national borders. Human rights, in turn, are universal, inalienable, and inherent.

International society currently faces a wide range of human rights issues. By comparing the role of the judiciary in the Asia-Pacific region, public law researchers and judges will unite to tackle these issues.

Within Japanese Constitutional law, scholars have developed a number of theories following the establishment of the new Constitution. In Japanese Constitutional studies, the judiciary is tasked with applying and announcing the law in concrete disputes between adversarial parties.

However, more is currently expected of the judiciary. The judiciary is to provide alternative dispute resolutions, and to find appropriate solutions in the role of guardian.

In the field of social security, social rights are no longer under the freedom of the government. Rather, they are constituted as substantial rights realized by legislation. The judiciary holds broad legislative discretion over the government. (Korea)

In the field of intellectual property rights, specialized judges are trained to cope with the complicated intellectual property issues that arise in Tokyo’s IP court. (Taiwan)

In the case of the reformed administrative case litigation act in China, the scope has been extended for the general public to ensure the legality of government action. (China)

The way in which Constitutionalism is maintained by the judiciary requires review. Some judges narrow their interpretation of the Constitution in particular cases. The general reluctance to deal with constitutional issues ought to be addressed. (Malaysia)

The judiciary should offer more flexible remedies for disputes, not only in terms of interpretation, but also in using alternative dispute resolution. In the case of medical malpractice, mediation might be helpful for patients. (Thailand)

The three basic principles of the Japanese Constitution are pacifism, people’s sovereignty, and fundamental rights. The judiciary has been found to marginalize minorities’ fundamental rights in favor of the majority in the parliament.

Thus, the judiciary of today may be better defined as an institution that provides not only pronouncements but also remedies in the face of concrete disputes. The question arises as to how a judiciary is to provide a concrete remedy for an infringement of human rights with a universal and inalienable character, and how such a judiciary might ensure human dignity.

Following the election of the House of Councilors in July, the ruling Liberal Democratic Party received a majority in the two Houses of the Diet. Two-thirds of the seats in both Houses are required to amend the Japanese Constitution. Amendment of the Constitution will remain controversial topic in the Asia-Pacific region.

This November, by inviting a number of expert judges and scholars from the Asia-Pacific region to participate, Japanese scholars aim to learn from their their valuable advice.