6/25/2020 Details of 2001 (Gyo-Tsu) 82 | Judgments of the Supreme Court members under the proportional representation system. After this amendment, voters are, in principle, required to write the names of persons on the HC Candidates List as prescribed in Article 86-3(1) of the Public Offices Election Law when voting in elections of HC members under the proportional representation system. Furthermore, Japanese citizens residing abroad exercised the right to vote under this system in elections held in 2001 and 2004. Taking these facts into account, it cannot be said that there will be unavoidable grounds to preclude Japanese citizens residing abroad from voting in elections of HR members under the single-seat constituency system and elections of HC members under the constituency system, at least at the time of the first general election of HR members or regular election of HC members to be held after this judgment is handed down. Therefore, it must be said that the part of the provision of Article 8 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Public Offices Election Law that limits, for the time being, the applicability of the overseas voting system to elections of members of the Houses of the Diet under the proportional representation system is in violation of Article 15(1) and (3), Article 43(1), and the proviso of Article 44 of the Constitution. III. Suits to seek declarations 1. Among the suits to seek declaration as the principal claims, the suit to seek declaration that the Public Offices Election Law before the Amendment is illegal for having precluded the jokoku appellants indicated in the attached List of Parties 1 from exercising the right to vote in elections of HR members and elections of HC members, is illegal due to lack of benefit of declaration, because this suit is intended to obtain declaration of legal relations in the past, and obtaining such declaration cannot be deemed to be an appropriate and necessary measure to directly and fundamentally solve an existing legal controversy. 2. Among the suits to seek declaration as the principal claims, the suit to seek declaration that the Public Offices Election Law after the Amendment is illegal for precluding the jokoku appellants indicated in the attached List of Parties 1 from exercising the right to vote in elections of HR members under the single-seat constituency system and elections of HC members under the constituency system, should be deemed to be illegal, because a suit is deemed to be illegal due to lack of benefit of declaration where it is possible to achieve the purpose of the suit by filing a more appropriate suit, and in this case, as mentioned in 3 below, a suit to seek declaration as the alternative claim for declaration is more appropriate. 3. The suit for the alternative claim for declaration can be understood as a suit brought under public law by a party to seek declaration on legal relations under public law. If Article 8 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Public Offices Election Law were not amended as required, the jokoku appellants indicated in the attached List of Parties 1 who are Japanese citizens residing abroad would be precluded from voting in an election of members under the singleseat constituency system in the next general election of HR members and in an election of members under the constituency system in the next regular election of HC members, or in other words, their right to exercise the right to vote would be violated. Therefore, the suit for the alternative claim for declaration can be deemed to be intended to obtain, in advance, declaration that the jokoku appellants will be eligible to exercise the right to vote in such elections on the grounds that Article 8 of the Supplementary Provisions of the Public Offices Election Law is unconstitutional and null, in order to prevent violation of the right to vote. The right to vote is meaningless if it cannot be exercised, and it is impossible to restore the substance of its exercise once it is violated. In light of the importance of the right to vote, if a person files a suit to seek declaration that the person shall be eligible to exercise the right to vote in a specific election when there is a controversy over such eligibility, benefit of declaration can be found if such suit can be regarded as an effective and appropriate means. Therefore, the suit for the alternative claim in this case can be regarded as a suit to seek declaration on legal relations under public law and benefit of declaration can be found as mentioned above. In addition, needless to https://www.courts.go.jp/app/hanrei_en/detail?id=1264 13/21