Comments on: State Redress Law http://japan.shadowofiris.com/law/state-redress-law/ japan.shadowofiris.com Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:11:12 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.1 By: ponta http://japan.shadowofiris.com/law/state-redress-law/#comment-2437 ponta Sat, 23 Jun 2007 09:49:19 +0000 http://japan.shadowofiris.com/law/state-redress-law/#comment-2437 Come to think of it article 22 is better example;"Freedom of all persons to move to a foreign country and to divest themselves of their nationality shall be inviolate." Here nanbito means Kokumin. Considering the fact that the supreme court has been cautious about judging the constitutionality of law, I think it will uphold the judgement of the high court. Come to think of it article 22 is better example;”Freedom of all persons to move to a foreign country and to divest themselves of their nationality shall be inviolate.” Here nanbito means Kokumin.
Considering the fact that the supreme court has been cautious about judging the constitutionality of law, I think it will uphold the judgement of the high court.

]]> By: ponta http://japan.shadowofiris.com/law/state-redress-law/#comment-2428 ponta Sat, 23 Jun 2007 05:35:18 +0000 http://japan.shadowofiris.com/law/state-redress-law/#comment-2428 As you point out, Tokyo court seems to have interpreted the article 17 of the constitution embodied in the State Redress Law 国家賠償法 第６条　この法律は、外国人が被害者である場合には、相互の保証があるときに限り、これを適用する. As for the constitutionality of the law, I am not sure how the supreme court will judge, but in general "anybody(nanbitomo) in the constitution is not interpreted literary. For instance just because "No person (nanbitomo) shall be permitted to be a member of both Houses simultaneously, (article 48 of the constitution), it does not follow that any foreigners are entitled to run for the Diet. But as you also pointed out, it is also true that the discussion has arisen among Japanese jurists. http://www.jicl.jp/now/saiban/backnumber/sengo_24.html As you point out, Tokyo court seems to have interpreted the article 17 of the constitution embodied in the State Redress Law
国家賠償法
第６条　この法律は、外国人が被害者である場合には、相互の保証があるときに限り、これを適用する.

As for the constitutionality of the law, I am not sure how the supreme court will judge, but in general “anybody(nanbitomo) in the constitution is not interpreted literary. For instance just because “No person (nanbitomo) shall be permitted to be a member of both Houses simultaneously, (article 48 of the constitution), it does not follow that any foreigners are entitled to run for the Diet.
But as you also pointed out, it is also true that the discussion has arisen among Japanese jurists.
http://www.jicl.jp/now/saiban/backnumber/sengo_24.html

]]>