Roundup: Japan's ruling bloc head ambiguous on security bills amid confusion, criticism from public, political heavyweights

A leader from the Japanese ruling camp on Friday failed to clarify a controversial security-related legislation package, which the bloc is seeking to pass in the parliament, repeating its ambiguous words during Diet debates that have confused the public and drawn flak from political heavyweights.

Believing that the country's pacifist Constitution, specifically Article 9, prevents Japan from defending other nations, or exercising the right to collective self-defense, Natsuo Yamaguchi, leader of Japan's Komeito Party, a junior coalition partner of Prime Minister Shinzo Abe's ruling Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), confused his audience by saying that the war-renouncing country has the right to engage in armed conflicts without being attacked.

The Japanese people have the right to live in liberty and to pursue happiness, according to Article 13 of Japan's Constitution, said Yamaguchi at the Foreign Correspondents' Club of Japan (FCCJ), adding that if human rights are in danger, Japan could exercise the right to collective defense in a capacity using the minimum amount of force.

Citing a scenario in which a third country was under attack and the conflict could seriously threaten or damage Japanese people's rights to liberty, he further explained that although it may be unclear whether the offender would attack Japan, Japan could help defend the country under attack so as to defend Japan's own people.

But Yamaguchi, an architect of the security legislation along with Abe, declined to specify such a scenario when he was asked to do so, stressing that the most important thing is that the country should be "fully prepared for the potential dangers" with "a comprehensive view of what is happening around Japan."

"It sounds ambiguous, but it is not ambiguous at all," the ruling bloc leader said equivocally. "I don't think it is necessary or helpful to give a specific example of what might happen or what might not happen." He said his Komeito Party discussed the legislation in 25 meetings with the LDP.

However, the Japanese public have not been receptive to the ruling bloc's marathon discussions and debates on the legislation, as 81.4 percent of the population believe the government's explanations about the security-related bills are "not sufficient, " according to a latest survey conducted by the Kyodo News.

Although the majority of Japanese people think the government should have sufficient discussion about the legislation, Yamaguchi said the ruling bloc aims to have the bills approved by the end of the current Diet session later this month if deliberations are not extended.

"We will try our best to ensure the passage of the bills during the current session. We understand that this will be a very difficult task, but because we have set this task from the beginning, we have the responsibility to see it through to the very end," he said.

"Since the legislation is profound and sophisticated in nature and wide ranging in content, it is not something you can immediately understand in just one hearing or our briefing," Yamaguchi said.

During a Diet debate, three constitutional law scholars invited to give testimony all agreed that the legislative package would " widen the range of activities by the Self-Defense Forces to allow for the exercise of the right to collective self-defense," which would make it unconstitutional.

"The opinion of the experts must be treated with great respect and we must humbly take their advice ... (But) the responsibility of protecting the Japanese people lies with the government. It is our responsibility to determine what the fundamental function of the Self-Defense Forces in international cooperation is and how the government views the Constitution," Yamaguchi argued.

During Yamaguchi's a press conference at the FCCJ, four former senior officials voiced their opposition to the security legislation and dismissed the "war bills" as jeopardizing the pacifism the country pursued after the end of the World War II.

The heavyweights includes former defense chief and vice President of the LDP Taku Yamasaki, former Finance Minister Hirohisa Fujii, former Chief Cabinet Secretary Masayoshi Takemura and former LDP policy chief Shizuka Kamei.

They told a press conference at the Japan National Press Club that it was unnecessary to have the new security legislation and the use of force would result in wrong national policy, adding that the right to collective defense could not help boost the SDF' s presence as a deterrence, but would greatly elevate the risk of Japan being engaged in war.

The press conference came after a joint appearance of former Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama and former Chief Cabinet Secretary Yohei Kono, at which both of the two political icons expressed their strong opposition to the new security bills. Endi