6/25/2020 Details of 2001 (Gyo-Tsu) 233 | Judgments of the Supreme Court 1. This is a suit to seek nullification of the election of members under the proportional representation system in Tokyo Constituency in the general election of members of the House of Representatives (hereinafter referred to as the "HR) held on June 25, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the "Election"), on the grounds that the provisions of the Public Offices Election Law on the mechanism of an election of HR members, under which the Election was held, are unconstitutional and null. 2. While imposing the restriction that both Houses shall consist of elected members, representatives of all the people (Article 43), the Constitution basically leaves it to the Diet's broad discretion to decide the specific mechanism of the election system applicable to members of each House, by providing that the number of the members of each House, electoral districts, and method of voting and other matters pertaining to election shall be fixed by law (Article 47). Therefore, the specific mechanism of the election system decided by the Diet should not be deemed to be unconstitutional unless it is against the restriction mentioned above or other constitutional requirements such as equality under the law and goes beyond the bounds of the Diet's discretion, and therefore it cannot be accepted. 3. Determination on whether or not to allow a person to become a candidate in two elections to be held at the same time is included in the scope of matters to be decided by the Diet at its discretion as part of the mechanism of the election system. Under the election system that allows dual candidacy, it is a natural consequence that a person who fails to win a seat in an election may also win a seat in another election. Currently, in an election of HR members, dual candidacy is allowed only for persons who belong to political parties or groups that satisfy the requirements under Article 86(1)(i) and (ii) of the Public Offices Election Law. If such a mechanism may be regarded as restricting citizens' freedom to stand as a candidate in an election without good reason, it must be deemed to be against the constitutional requirements. However, it can also be construed that such requirement is imposed so as to establish a policy-oriented or partyoriented election system based on the idea that such political parties or groups that seem to have organizations to put citizens' political will together, carry out appropriate activities continuously, and enjoy citizens' support are suitable for participating in an election under the single-seat constituency system while advocating their own policy, and it is obviously included in the scope of the Diet's discretion to establish such a policy-oriented or party-oriented election system. Consequently, it seems considerably reasonable to limit persons who are eligible for dual candidacy in an election under the proportional representation system and an election under the single-seat constituency system, both of which are policy-oriented or partyoriented election systems, to those who belong to political parties or groups that have reported candidates for an election under the single-seat constituency system above and also submitted a House of Representatives Candidate List as provided in any of the subparagraphs of Article 86-2(1) of the Public Offices Election Law. Such limitation cannot be deemed to be unduly restricting citizens' freedom to stand as a candidate or exercise of the right to vote and therefore it cannot be regarded as going beyond the bounds of the Diet's direction. As the number of persons in dual candidacy shall be excluded from the number of persons on a House of Representatives Candidate List (Paragraph 5 of the said article), political parties or groups that have submitted a House of Representatives Candidate List and also reported candidates for an election under the singleseat constituency system will be able to include more candidates on the list than such political parties or groups that have only submitted the list. Furthermore, as the scale of an electoral campaign shall depend on the number of persons on the candidate list (Article 141(3) of the said law), such political parties or groups that has submitted the list and also reported candidates for an election under the singleseat constituency system will also be able to carry out a larger electoral campaign. This difference cannot be deemed to be in https://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_en/detail?id=569 7/9