Written on July 2, 2019, this essay compares the positions of Japan’s political parties on the issue of imperial succession and sharply criticizes, in particular, the ambiguous and contradictory stance of the Democratic Party for the People.
Through discussion of the views of the imperial institution and history underlying the acceptance of matrilineal and female emperors, the restoration of former imperial family members to imperial status, and the issues surrounding the debate over Princess Aiko, it brings into focus the essential points at stake in imperial succession.
As an issue that most directly reveals each party’s view of the imperial house and of the nation itself, this is a piece calling for careful and serious deliberation.

2019-07-02
Those who oppose the restoration of former imperial status emphasize that it feels strange for someone who has been a commoner for seventy years to return, but do they feel no strangeness about a purely commoner male, from generation to generation, becoming a member of the imperial family?

What follows is a continuation of the previous chapter.
The vague Democratic Party for the People.　
What has seemed especially strange to me recently is the “issue of imperial succession.”　
Within the Liberal Democratic Party, centered on Upper House member Shigeharu Aoyama and others, the group “Association to Protect Japan’s Dignity and National Interest” was launched, and it declared that one of its goals was “imperial succession through the paternal line (male line).”
I hope this will also activate discussion within the LDP.
The Constitutional Democratic Party launched the “Association to Consider Stable Imperial Succession,” and the Democratic Party for the People launched the “Imperial Succession Review Committee,” and on the same day, June 11, they announced their ways of thinking concerning qualifications for imperial succession.　
Looking at the substance, the Constitutional Democratic Party takes the position of recognizing matrilineal and female emperors.
It differs from my own thinking, but it is a claim very much like that party.
It follows the content discussed in the “Advisory Council on the Imperial Household Law” under the Koizumi Cabinet.
The Communist Party also supports acceptance of matrilineal and female emperors, and moreover this is likely a view taken with an eye to “the abolition of the imperial house.”　
Constitutional scholar Yasuhiro Okudaira, now deceased, whose thinking was close to that of the Communist Party and who argued that the imperial house and democracy cannot coexist, expressed the following expectation regarding the birth of a matrilineal emperor who does not have an emperor in the father’s line.
It “contains within itself a factor that erodes from within the ideology of ‘an unbroken line for ages eternal,’ which is the very basis of legitimacy for the imperial system” (monthly Sekai, August 2004 issue).　
Likewise, constitutional scholar Koichi Yokota, who held that the hereditary imperial system is inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Constitution, also stated, “To recognize a matrilineal emperor would work socially to weaken the emperor’s power to integrate the nation” (Subcommittee of the House of Representatives Commission on the Constitution, February 5, 2004), and, “If there were a matrilineal emperor, an authoritative emperor would probably never revive” (government Advisory Council on the Imperial Household Law, May 31, 2005).　
This is probably where the Communist Party’s aim lies, and whether consciously or not, the Constitutional Democratic Party’s claims too seem to contain the same intention.　
Then there is the Democratic Party for the People.
Representative Tamaki announced that he places importance on “imperial succession through the male line.”
He also says that he recognizes a female emperor within the male line.
It is a historical fact that there have been eight female emperors across ten reigns in the past.
However, Representative Tamaki has gone even further.
He says that the Imperial Household Law should be revised, the order of imperial succession changed, and “Princess Aiko” placed first.
I cannot make any sense of this at all.
It treats lightly the positions of Crown Prince Akishino and Prince Hisahito.
To put it more strongly, it is a way of thinking tantamount to abolishing Prince Hisahito’s imperial status equals the usurpation of the throne.
The Democratic Party for the People’s proposal is in itself insolent, and it can be said to be a great nuisance to the members of the imperial house.　
If that is so, then rather than clinging to the direct line, should we not discuss much more the restoration of former imperial status for men of the male line, including the former imperial families?
There is the opinion that it would be strange to restore imperial status so easily,
but no one is saying that adult former imperial family members should suddenly be restored to imperial status at once.
They could first be hired as commissioned staff of the Imperial Household Agency and participate in various activities, and from the generation of their children, imperial education could be given and they could be recognized as imperial family members — that kind of process could be followed.
To begin with, if Princess Aiko were to become a female emperor and were to marry, what if her spouse were a commoner?
Those who oppose the restoration of former imperial status emphasize that it feels strange for someone who has been a commoner for seventy years to return, but do they feel no strangeness about a purely commoner male, from generation to generation, becoming a member of the imperial family?
That is plainly contradictory.　
To begin with, when parties such as the Constitutional Democratic Party argue for accepting matrilineal emperors, they speak as though, in the background, “the imperial house itself has such an intention.”
However, according to a certain government official, “when the wishes of female members of the imperial family were confirmed, they said clearly that they did not desire such a thing.”　
In any case, I cannot understand the Democratic Party for the People’s claims at all.
On the surface it puts on a conservative mask of “imperial succession through the male line,” while behind that it brings forward “Princess Aiko as a female emperor” in pursuit of popular appeal.
The Democratic Party for the People made the creation of female branches of the imperial family, which it had at first dismissed as having little logical meaning, into an Upper House election pledge.
In other words, it pandered to public opinion at the present moment.
If so, it must be said that the Democratic Party for the People has almost no reason to exist.　
On the “issue of imperial succession,” each party’s view of the imperial house and of history appears directly.
I would like all parties to proceed with careful deliberation.