Permanent Residents Want The Vote

[dimwit]

I dunno. I get the impression the dioxin-incinerator-decisions, as well as pretty much all important decisions, are made by a combination of corruption and gyosei shidou ("administrative guidance"). Where was that town where an architecturally significant school building was partially demolished even though practically everybody in the town was opposed to the demolition?

In our neighborhood their has been a big brouhaha about a 10 story condo proposed for the smack dab in the middle of a single unit residental area. The problem being that this is a very old area that was never bombed during the war and has consequently has a pre war street/goat path network of roads. People rightly fear that this will lead to traffic congestion. The result has been that the voice of local opposition was loud enough to force the developer to back off. From what I am gathering this seems to be happening more and more these days.

-catone
-Cametoe, NV? Oh yeah, it's about an hour west of Beaver, UT. It's where you go if you want to buy booze on Sundays.

I'm surprised you never asked about Trannie Scrotum. My sources tell me that the name was origninally Tran'ee Scro'dum in the Blackfoot language which means 'unfinished business'.

[Catoneinutica]

In our neighborhood their has been a big brouhaha about a 10 story condo proposed for the smack dab in the middle of a single unit residental area. The problem being that this is a very old area that was never bombed during the war and has consequently has a pre war street/goat path network of roads. People rightly fear that this will lead to traffic congestion. The result has been that the voice of local opposition was loud enough to force the developer to back off. From what I am gathering this seems to be happening more and more these days.

If the developer backed off, I'd figure he did it for his own reasons. If there's money to be made, you can be sure he'll return with a slightly modified plan - 8 storeys instead of 10, or perhaps a stepwise combination of both, different parking lot access, etc. That's what happened with a condo that Tokyo Tatemono (=Mitsui?) put across the street from my mother-in-law's house. The existing homeowner ritually put up banners and staged demonstrations against the project until the developer knocked off a couple of floors, changed the shape of the building to permit more sunlight to pass through, and moved the garbage collection areas. They also gave her 200,000 yen for "soundproofed windows," which I think she should've told them to pound up their asses, a la Joe Pesci in Casino. What really annoyed me was that she said the developer's representatives were "yakuza-ppoi." Assholes.

Really though, the whole thing was a fait accompli from the word go. How can a bunch of poor katagi take on a developer backed by a Mitsui or Mitsubishi?

[dimwit]

I think the political dynamics out here are a little bit different. The LDP lost the Upper House elections in Ehime for the first time ever. That shocked them and they realize that they vulnerable in this year's lower house poll. Resultingly, it has been hardly business as usual and siding with a developer over a community isn't a great vote getter.

[Mulboyne]

Since some of this discussion has arisen because Korea has granted suffrage to permanent residents, it is interesting that the Lee Myung-bak, the incoming South Korean President, recently also raised the proposal of allowing foreigners to become public employees (Japanese).

[Takechanpoo]

[Mulboyne]

Yomiuri: DPJ plans foreigner-friendly move - To form league aimed at letting permanent residents vote in local polls

The Democratic Party of Japan will launch on Wednesday a league of lawmakers aimed at improving the legal status of permanent foreign residents in preparation for its submission of a bill granting such residents local suffrage in the current Diet session, it has been learned. Party Vice President Katsuya Okada is expected to become chairman of the league, which will be formed under the auspices of DPJ President Ichiro Ozawa. The DPJ is looking to align on the bill with New Komeito--a party strongly in favor of granting permanent foreign residents the right to vote in local elections. The Liberal Democratic Party has deep-rooted resistance to giving permanent foreign residents the right to vote in local elections, and some LDP lawmakers feel that the bill is a move to drive a wedge between the LDP and New Komeito. Keiko Chiba, chairwoman of the DPJ's Administration Committee, is among those joining with Okada to urge lawmakers to join the league. The party hopes more than 50 lawmakers will sign on. Ozawa stands firm on his view that the right to vote in local elections should be granted to permanent foreign residents. He conveyed his intention to submit the bill to the current Diet session to Lee Sang Deuk, South Korea's National Assembly vice speaker and leader of a transition committee for President-elect Lee Myung Bak, in a meeting on Jan. 18. "The ruling parties will be startled if we submit the bill to the House of Councillors and call on the support of New Komeito," a DPJ lawmaker said. Some party lawmakers, however, have raised strong objections to the bill, saying that it has "constitutional problems." A source close to the league said Ozawa decided on Okada to chair the league because he believed the vice president was capable of harmonizing views within the party on the issue. Discussions on a bill that New Komeito submitted in 2005 to grant local suffrage to permanent foreign residents have carried over to the current session. New Komeito leader Akihiro Ota said at a press conference Friday, "I hope DPJ lawmakers unite in support of New Komeito's bill."

[AssKissinger]

Boooooooooooooooooo

[Greji]

Boooooooooooooooooo

May I add my vote to AKs? Boooooooooooooooooooooo. Ya wanna vote, become a citizen. I think it is simply a matter that Ozawa feels thinks he can pick up more votes for the opposition parties, than any true feeling love and compassion for the rights for zainnichi, or other FGs!

[Mulboyne]

Yomiuri: Foreign residents' suffrage not political issue

The issue of whether to provide local suffrage to foreign permanent residents has already been settled. So why is it brought up time and again?..A 1995 Supreme Court ruling on the issue clearly stipulates that the right to select and dismiss public officials under Article 15 of the Constitution rests with "Japanese people," meaning those who have Japanese nationality. It also says that the "residents" who choose heads and assembly members of local governments should be "Japanese people"...The law stipulating procedures to be followed in the event of an armed attack on the nation and the people's protection law call for cooperation between the central and local governments during an emergency. If foreigners holding the nationality of a nation hostile to Japan abused their permanent resident status and exercised their voting right to obstruct cooperation between the state and local governments, Japan's safety would be threatened...more...

[Mulboyne]

On the TV programme "Hikari Ota's If I Were Prime Minister... Secretary Tanaka" a motion - "manifesto" - is proposed for debate and then accepted or rejected by a vote at the end. One of the manifestos proposed last October by Mona Yamamoto, who has a Norwegian father but Japanese nationality, was "All foreigners who have lived in Japan for more than 10 years should be allowed to vote in local elections".



You may have missed the broadcast but it appears that someone, describing herself as an Osaka housewife, has reproduced the entire Japanese transcript on her blog and included screenshots. I can't be arsed to translate the whole thing but here are a few items, not in chronological order:

The background we all probably know: that 1 in 60 in Japan are now foreigners (Taro just posted the Mainichi article with more recent data). In Shinjuku, as many as 1 in 10 are foreign and some public schools have 20% foreign pupils. Foreign residents pay tax and national insurance but have no vote.

One opponent of the motion suggests that citizens should become Japanese to get the vote. Third generation Korean Masamori Tokuyama admits that it would probably be an easy process but says that he can't change the blood that his father gave him so it wouldn't feel right. Australian Melanie says the problem is that Japan does not allow dual nationality. If she is forced to give up her Australian citizenship to take a Japanese passport, she will no longer be able to buy a house in Australia and will face other investment barriers. Dr. John Muwete Muluaka, born in Congo but now naturalized, says that she sounds like a polygamist who wants several spouses when the law of the land allow allows one. Melanie separately asks why having a Japanese passport should suddenly mean that someone would became a "pro-Japan" citizen. Setsu Kobayashi says the nation is like a ship in which everyone sails. He says that if foreigners keep another nationality and Japan faces problems, they can flee the sinking ship. If they only have Japanese nationality, they'll make decisions in the interests of the "ship".

Politician Katsuei Hirasawa says that the Political Funds Law forbids politicians from accepting donations from non-Japanese which is designed to prevent undue overseas influence on domestic policy-making. He believes that giving foreign residents a vote would be another way for foreign influence to enter domestic debates and so he opposes the motion. He points out that local policy often has national implications such as the decision by Shimane to declare Takeshima Day. He says that Korean residents with voting power would likely have opposed the move. He suggests that if foreigners had the vote, you might find some schools in Osaka raising the Korean flag alongside the Japanese flag in graduation ceremonies.

In the end, the motion is rejected 73% to 27%.

[Mulboyne]

Yomiuri: DPJ may face backlash over suffrage issue

Democratic Party of Japan President Ichiro Ozawa's pet project to give foreign permanent residents the right to vote in local elections is facing fierce opposition within the party. The party has been discussing the issue through the vehicle of an advisory body. However, the discussion reached a stalemate, with both sides locked in a bitter confrontation. Some party members say it is likely that the party will postpone concluding the issue until after the next general election for the House of Representatives. The DPJ has said that it would work to realize local suffrage for foreign permanent residents as part of the party's basic policy formulated at the party's founding in 1998. In February, Ozawa met with South Korean President Lee Myung Bak in Seoul prior to his inauguration. Ozawa promised Lee that he would make efforts to reach consensus within the party as soon as possible on the issue of granting local suffrage to South Korean and other foreign permanent residents in Japan. Ozawa then instructed his consultative body, which is led by top DPJ adviser Kozo Watanabe, to discuss the issue. The body began discussions in June. Discussions were scheduled to conclude at the seventh meeting last Tuesday, and a proposal was to be submitted within the month. However, the two sides failed to compromise. Proponents of the policy shift--led by DPJ Deputy President Katsuya Okada--said the government should give foreign permanent residents local suffrage to make Japan a more multicultural country. Conversely, opponents of the plan--led by lower house members Jin Matsubara, Akihisa Nagashima and Hirofumi Ryu--said foreign permanent residents should become naturalized Japanese citizens if they want voting rights.

[Greji]

.... --said foreign permanent residents should become naturalized Japanese citizens if they want voting rights.....

Right on!

[Mulboyne]

The DPJ's Ozawa has indicated he will look to promote legislation to grant suffrage to permanent residents in local elections.

Nikkei (Japanese)

[Yokohammer]

I'm kind of on the fence about this one.

But I do find comments like "foreign permanent residents should become naturalized Japanese citizens if they want voting rights" to be a bit disingenuous in the sense that Japan doesn't make it particularly easy for people to become Japanese citizens, especially people they don't particularly want to have as citizens (they really screwed up with Debito, didn't they). Not that I think it should be "easy" -- in fact I don't -- but the comment is deceptive.

But while we're demanding voting rights, can we demand a selection of decent candidates as well?

[IkemenTommy]

[omae mona]

I'm kind of on the fence about this one.

But I do find comments like "foreign permanent residents should become naturalized Japanese citizens if they want voting rights" to be a bit disingenuous in the sense that Japan doesn't make it particularly easy for people to become Japanese citizens, especially people they don't particularly want to have as citizens (they really screwed up with Debito, didn't they). Not that I think it should be "easy" -- in fact I don't -- but the comment is deceptive.

Everything I've read actually leads me to believe it's easier, in many ways, to get citizenship than to get permanent residence. Yes, the paperwork burden is apparently heavier for citizenship applications. But the qualifications to get permanent residence seem to be a lot tighter.

What Japan does do, though, to make naturalization painful, is to disallow dual citizenship. They'd have a lot more people willing to naturalize if they did not have to give up their other citizenship. Not too many people want to handcuff themselves to a sinking ship...

[Ketou]

They'd have a lot more people willing to naturalize if they did not have to give up their other citizenship. Not too many people want to handcuff themselves to a sinking ship...

Except those already living on a sunken ship.
Certainly not a great many pluses to citizenship here though....

[Mulboyne]

...Not too many people want to handcuff themselves to a sinking ship...

It's ironic you use that phrase because that's also a reason given by opponents of dual nationality. They argue that if you have dual nationality then you can vote on national affairs without having to accept full responsibility for your decisions. As I summarized it here:

Setsu Kobayashi says the nation is like a ship in which everyone sails. He says that if foreigners keep another nationality and Japan faces problems, they can flee the sinking ship. If they only have Japanese nationality, they'll make decisions in the interests of the "ship".

[AssKissinger]

[wuchan]

[Takechanpoo]

You gaijins should think that there is no China next to America or Europe.
The more serious problem is future Zainichi Chinese rather than Zainichi Korean.
DPJ have insisted so far that they would accept 20 million immigrants. Needless to say, most of the 20 million immigrants will be Chinese. If we Japanese gave suffrage to permanent residents, it would become more easy for China to control Japan from inside it. In fact DPJ's immigration policy was originally requested(accurately ordered) by China which is DPJ's main sponsor.

[wuchan]

You gaijins should think that there is no China next to America or Europe.
The more serious problem is future Zainichi Chinese rather than Zainichi Korean.
DPJ have insisted so far that they would accept 20 million immigrants. Needless to say, most of the 20 million immigrants will be Chinese. If we Japanese gave suffrage to permanent residents, it would become more easy for China to control Japan from inside it. In fact DPJ's immigration policy was originally requested(accurately ordered) by China which is DPJ's main sponsor.

wow you are dumb as shit.

If the J-gov allows a bunch of korean and chinese to immigrate they can keep the "pure nihonjin" illusion going. "hafu" refers to half LOOKING half kids. Half jap and half random other asian is indistinguishable from the "pure" locals.

Get over yourself. You are descended from central asians, modern archaeology has proven it. You can hide and cry now.

[Yokohammer]

Everything I've read actually leads me to believe it's easier, in many ways, to get citizenship than to get permanent residence. Yes, the paperwork burden is apparently heavier for citizenship applications. But the qualifications to get permanent residence seem to be a lot tighter.

What Japan does do, though, to make naturalization painful, is to disallow dual citizenship. They'd have a lot more people willing to naturalize if they did not have to give up their other citizenship. Not too many people want to handcuff themselves to a sinking ship...

That's interesting. I was under the impression it was a lot harder. But the dual citizenship thing is a problem. I initially didn't think much of it because I believed that my country of birth (Oz) didn't allow dual citizenship anyway ... but I just discovered that Australia has allowed dual citizenship since 2002! Dang! Now it's personal!

[Mulboyne]

That's interesting. I was under the impression it was a lot harder. But the dual citizenship thing is a problem. I initially didn't think much of it because I believed that my country of birth (Oz) didn't allow dual citizenship anyway ... but I just discovered that Australia has allowed dual citizenship since 2002! Dang! Now it's personal!

Australia's stance on dual nationality wasn't quite so clear cut. The relevant part of the 1948 act said:

[quote]A person, being an Australian citizens who has attained the age of 18 years, who does any act or thing: (a) the sole or dominant purpose of which]
However, any foreign national granted Australian citizenship was not obliged to give anything up and became a de facto dual national. Their children could also be dual nationals since they didn't have to do anything to be entitled to both passports. This created an anomaly where "born and bred" Australians had fewer rights than immigrants. However, the argument against dual nationality was always that it treated citizenship "as a commodity to be sought for economic reasons or convenience of travel arrangements, employment opportunities or tax advantages". Eventually, the case became overwhelming and, as you say, dual nationality is now permitted for all.

[Yokohammer]

Australia's stance on dual nationality wasn't quite so clear cut. The relevant part of the 1948 act said ... (etc.)

I wasn't aware of that interesting slice of legal history. Thanks for that. I was aware, however, that as a "born and bred" Australian dual citizenship wasn't an option, and nobody bothered to send me a postcard when the rules changed, so I didn't even consider the possibility. But now, if through some political miracle Japan did decide to allow dual citizenship, I might actually consider it. But not if I had to give up my Australian citizenship. I can see how some people might consider that to be taking advantage of the situation, but hey, it would probably make life a lot easier!

[omae mona]

It's ironic you use that phrase because that's also a reason given by opponents of dual nationality. They argue that if you have dual nationality then you can vote on national affairs without having to accept full responsibility for your decisions. As I summarized it here:

Indeed. The analogy is similar, but the real question is whether one thinks the ship is currently sailing, or already sinking.

[maraboutslim]

It doesn't really matter what any country's stance is on dual-citizenship since they don't have jurisdiction over the other country anyway and therefore can't make you give up your citizenship in that country or take away your passport (which technically is the property of the other country).

[james]

[Ketou]

It doesn't really matter what any country's stance is on dual-citizenship since they don't have jurisdiction over the other country anyway and therefore can't make you give up your citizenship in that country or take away your passport (which technically is the property of the other country).

Then could one country revoke your citizenship for failing to give up another?

[omae mona]

Then could one country revoke your citizenship for failing to give up another?

That is exactly the penalty that is mentioned in many immigration laws. But in practice, nobody seems to have ever seen it actually happen despite the threats.