TOKYO - The Supreme Court’s Second Petty Bench, presided over by Chief Justice Akira Ojima, ruled on September 26th that the current system for apportioning seats in the House of Representatives is constitutional, despite a maximum disparity of 2.06-to-1 in the value of votes cast in last October’s general election.
The ruling came in response to 16 lawsuits filed nationwide by voters seeking to invalidate the election, arguing that the system violates constitutional guarantees of equality under the law. The plaintiffs claimed the apportionment method creates electoral districts that are not proportional to population.
The court acknowledged that the disparity had reached 2.06-to-1 between the smallest and largest districts—specifically, between Tottori’s 1st District, including Tottori City, and Hokkaido’s 3rd District, covering part of Sapporo City. However, it emphasized that the disparity had narrowed from 2.08-to-1 in the 2021 election and said the newly adopted formula for seat distribution “has significantly reduced the imbalance and is reasonable.”
While the judgment reaffirmed the legality of the current framework, plaintiffs and their representatives strongly criticized the decision, arguing that the Constitution requires elections based strictly on proportional representation. One lawyer commented, “This is an outrageous ruling. The Constitution guarantees elections based on population proportionality, and this decision should have been one of unconstitutionality.”
Source: Kyodo
