Latest news with #PoliticalFundsControlAct
The Mainichi
03-07-2025
- Politics
- The Mainichi
3 running in 2024 Japan election used LDP funds despite no party backing due to scandal
TOKYO -- The official campaign period for the House of Councillors election got underway on July 3 as the lingering issue of "money in politics" continues to haunt Japan. In the 2024 House of Representatives election, the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) faced severe headwinds due to a slush fund scandal involving the party's faction fundraising parties. When the Mainichi Shimbun traced the cases of three former and incumbent lawmakers who were not officially endorsed by the LDP in the race due to the money scandal, it emerged that they had been engaged in certain common behavior. The three were Kazuyuki Nakane, 55, who ran in the Saitama No. 6 constituency, Katsuei Hirasawa, 79, in the Tokyo No. 17 constituency, and Koichi Hagiuda, 61, in the Tokyo No. 24 constituency. Nakane lost in the election while the other two were elected. When the Mainichi examined the election campaign income and expenditure reports, it was discovered that the three had used funds from the LDP branches they respectively headed in their campaigning for the general election. Under the Political Funds Control Act and the Public Offices Election Act, candidates, even if they are not running on the ticket of political parties, are not prohibited from using the funds of party branches as their election expenses. However, these three candidates essentially ran in the 2024 race as independents to take responsibility over the slush fund scandal. Independent candidates are not granted party endorsement fees and have no chance of being elected through proportional representation if they lose in single-seat constituencies. These should have been the stringent measures they faced in the election based on the party's "deep remorse," as described by Prime Minister and LDP President Shigeru Ishiba. Regardless, the LDP headquarters had provided 20 million yen (approx. $139,100) to the party branches led by the three candidates shortly before the election, using party subsidies funded by taxpayers' money. Hagiuda at the time explained, "Of course, I didn't use any of the funds as my election expenses this time," and reported via his office's X account that he had returned the funds to the LDP headquarters. In reality, however, Hagiuda and the other two candidates did cover their campaign expenses with funds from their respective LDP branches. In the case of Nakane, the LDP decided not to back him in the lower house race on Oct. 9, 2024. He subsequently received a total of 5.5 million yen (around $38,200) from his LDP branch through Nov. 8. Similarly, Hirasawa and Hagiuda received 7.35 million yen (about $51,100) and 5 million yen (roughly $34,800), respectively, in donations from their LDP branches. In addition, Nakane and Hagiuda had received other donations from their LDP branches before they were declared non-endorsed candidates. All three used the funds to cover the rent of their offices, print their campaign posters, and cater for boxed lunches, among other expenses. Tomoaki Iwai, professor emeritus at Nihon University and an expert on elections and political funding, points out that the three non-endorsed candidates should have taken responsibility in the election in financial terms as well. "The LDP branches receive 'party funds' from the party headquarters and its Tokyo chapter. As non-endorsed candidates, they should explain about the consistency to voters." When the Mainichi queried the three candidates about this question, a public secretary to Hirasawa replied, "He cannot respond as he is too busy with the Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly election and the upper house contest." Hagiuda's office responded via fax, "We properly conduct election campaigns in compliance with laws and regulations. " Nakane's secretary, who served as his campaign accountant in the general election, was the only one who told their side of the story in detail. According to the secretary, donations by supporters and supportive companies had been paid into the account of the LDP branch headed by Nakane, and the funds were diverted for his election expenses. Regarding the reason for this, the secretary initially told the Mainichi, "That's because Nakane headed the branch even though he was a non-endorsed candidate." However, the secretary later contacted the Mainichi, saying, "I retract the answer that it was because he headed the branch. I've consulted with Nakane himself and will make our formal response as follows: 'We are properly dealing with political funds in accordance with laws and regulations.'" The secretary stated their view that "because the party branch was accepting individual donations, he (Nakane) was only using those funds in his election." This view is related to the discussions over a review of corporate and organizational donations to political parties during the recently closed ordinary session of the Diet. Will Japan continue to allow political party branches to receive donations? A new election period has begun while the question remains unanswered.
The Mainichi
30-06-2025
- Business
- The Mainichi
Editorial: Japan's LDP has breached the public trust with corporate donations Diet dodge
The ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)'s unwillingness to take responsibility and measures over the money in politics issue is tantamount to a breach of public trust. The Diet did not revise the Political Funds Control Act regarding the treatment of corporate and organizational donations during the ordinary session that closed in late June. This was because the LDP refused to accede to the Constitutional Democratic Party of Japan and other opposition parties' demands that these donations be banned in principle, insisting instead that they continue. The bills respectively submitted by both sides have been carried over for further discussions, with no prospect they will be passed. The LDP-sponsored bill is designed to boost the transparency of corporate and organizational donations while retaining the system. Under the bill, the names of companies that donated upward of 10 million yen (approx. $69,000) a year will be released alongside their amounts. However, just 5% or so of the LDP's branches will be required to make such a disclosure, leaving an enormous loophole. In the first instance, donations to political parties by specific companies and organizations could distort policy. In the "Heisei-era political reform" about 30 years ago, it was envisaged that such donations would be banned after five years, but successive LDP administrations have shelved the issue. In the wake of the LDP factions' slush fund scandal, the need for reviewing those donations was once again pointed out, but the Shigeru Ishiba administration has repeatedly postponed a conclusion since its inauguration last autumn. Amid strong resistance within the LDP, Prime Minister and party chief Ishiba stopped short of exercising his leadership by drastically reforming the system. The issue of political funds concerns the management and governance of all political parties. Essentially, reform must be carried forward based at least on an agreement among the largest parties in the ruling and opposition camps. However, the LDP did not even agree to set a deadline for reaching consensus with the opposition. The responsibility of Komeito, the LDP's junior ruling coalition partner, and the Democratic Party for the People (DPFP) is also grave as they have the de facto deciding vote under the minority government. Even though the two parties had called for stringent regulations for corporate and organizational donations, they changed course after negotiations with the LDP led to a move to allow such donations on condition that political funding reports be submitted online. While Komeito and the DPFP claim that digitizing the process will make it easier to check political funds, it will only end up preserving conventional donations. After the parties faced a public backlash for snuggling up to the LDP, they even stopped trying to get involved in drafting the bill. In the recent Tokyo Metropolitan Assembly election, considered a prelude to the July House of Councillors race, the LDP suffered a major setback, with the slush fund scandal hitting its faction in the assembly. If the LDP is to keep turning its back on moving to ban corporate and organizational donations, it will have to pay even a higher electoral bill. The party should be aware of the harsh gaze cast by voters.
The Mainichi
20-05-2025
- Politics
- The Mainichi
Japan minister 'disqualified' for job over rice gift gaffe, but no legal breach: expert
TOKYO -- Consumers feeling the pain of rising rice prices in Japan are voicing anger at agriculture minister Taku Eto over recent remarks that included the comment, "My supporters give me plenty of rice, so I have enough to sell." One expert said that if Eto does not understand the pain of most people, it disqualifies him from his role as minister. Eto, who was speaking publicly in the southwestern Japan city of Saga on May 18, apologized and retracted the comment the next evening, saying he had "greatly exaggerated." Yet, the question has arisen as to whether politicians could face legal action if they receive rice from supporters. Eto made the comments during a lecture at the "Saga political and economic seminar," which followed the ruling coalition Liberal Democratic Party (LDP)'s Saga Prefecture chapter convention. After mentioning that brown rice is "more nutritious than polished rice," he said, "I have never bought rice myself," and continued, "It's also a lot of work to receive rice. Sometimes there are even stones mixed in it." The next day, Eto explained that he had wanted to encourage people to "buy brown rice, polish it, and enjoy eating it," because reserve stocks are sometimes sold as brown rice. However, Eto also noted that his wife told him, "It's not as if we cover all our needs with what's given to us," and he did not deny receiving rice from supporters. The Political Funds Control Act requires political organizations to record and disclose the receipt and expenditure of political funds in their reports. The question is whether rice could constitute "political funds." Hiroshi Kamiwaki, a professor at Kobe Gakuin University and an expert on the Political Funds Control Act, stated that rice was most likely received privately, and he believes it would not constitute political funds. If a politician were to receive large quantities of rice from a specific individual or company, it could be viewed as a bribe depending on the content of their duties as agriculture minister or the timing of the gift. Still, Kamiwaki noted, "If rice was given by a rice dealer, it could raise suspicion, but I think it would be regarded as (an issue of) whether it's a matter of political ethics." Kamiwaki also criticized Eto's words and actions as careless in light of "ministerial norms" which forbid acts that invite the people's distrust through close business ties: "There's no penalty, but this involves political responsibility, and he should not have received rice from supporters." Touching upon the issue of rising consumer prices of late, Kamiwaki concluded, "Eto's statement is honest in a sense, but he does not understand the lives of the common people. If he does not understand the pain of the majority of the people, it disqualifies him as a minister."
