Environmental Minister Asao Faces Allegations of Election Law Violation

The mysterious flyer distributed during the Kamakura city council election

The flyer distributed before the announcement of the Kamakura City Council election reads:

“I am supporting the candidacy of Mr. Ito Michikuni and ask for your help to ensure his victory.”

This flyer, distributed under the name of Minister of the Environment Keiichiro Asao (61), is highly likely to be a violation of election laws. The content of the flyer likely falls under the category of pre-election campaigning, which is prohibited by the Public Offices Election Act.

The distinction between political activities and election campaigns is not widely known. Political activities refer to actions like everyday policy advocacy and national reports that do not directly relate to elections. On the other hand, election campaigns are actions intended to help elect a specific candidate in a particular election and are strictly regulated by the Public Offices Election Act. One such regulation prohibits the act of supporting a specific candidate before the official announcement or proclamation of an election. This is referred to as pre-election campaigning and is forbidden.

The controversial flyer was distributed before the announcement of the Kamakura City Council election (announced on April 20 and voted on April 27). In mid-April, several residents in the Imaizumi district of Kamakura received the flyer through mail or delivery, promoting Ito Michikuni (82 years old, unsuccessful candidate). The flyer consisted of three parts: the first page, distributed under the name of Minister Asao, stated, “I support the candidacy of Mr. Ito Michikuni and wish to help him win.” The second page provided information about Minister Asao’s upcoming street speech, and the third page outlined Ito’s achievements.

Since this flyer was distributed before the election’s official announcement, there are no legal issues if it’s related to political activity. However, the first page, which mentions specific support for a candidate, strongly suggests the flyer is intended as election campaigning, which is highly likely to be in violation of the law.

Professor Hiroshi Komatsu of the Ritsumeikan University Faculty of Law, who researches election systems and constitutional law, comments:

“This flyer contains the words ‘Kamakura City Council election’ and ‘I support Mr. Ito Michikuni and wish to help him win.’ This is considered a direct or indirect act of securing votes or supporting a candidate’s victory in a particular election, which is a form of election campaigning. Since the flyer was distributed before the official announcement, it qualifies as pre-election campaigning under the Public Offices Election Act. While the second page about the street speech could be considered political activity, the first page makes it clear that the entire flyer likely violates the Public Offices Election Act.”

What the responsible secretary revealed in a phone interview

When asked about his thoughts on the flyer and whether it could potentially violate the Public Office Election Law, Minister Asao’s office responded in writing:

“The document at the end of your question includes Minister Asao’s signature, but he has not signed this document, nor did he instruct anyone to create it. The signature appears to be a forgery, and we are currently confirming the circumstances and who was responsible for creating it.”

It turns out that Minister Asao’s signature on the flyer was indeed forged. To get further clarification, a reporter from FRIDAY Digital contacted his secretary by phone, and the following responses were given:

— The first page of the flyer has Minister Asao’s signature. Does this mean it was forged?

“The Minister himself has no recognition of the text on this first page. He’s surprised and asking, ‘Who sent this out?’”

— Do you know who is responsible for this?

“I don’t know immediately. We are in the process of confirming this.”

— Does the Minister acknowledge the second page with the event announcement?

“Yes, he is aware of that. This is a legitimate event that will be held.”

— Was the second page sent out to the residents of the Imaizumi area?

“It was sent to members of the Asao Association. The Asao Association is his supporters’ group, and this notice was sent to those living in the Imaizumi area. That much is certain.”

— So, the second page was sent to the supporters, but what about the first page?

“We don’t have any recognition, either on my part or the Minister’s part, of sending that out. So we’re just as confused as to what this is.”

— So, there was no post-distribution before the election?

“Correct. We did not do that. We do not engage in such actions.”

Regarding the first flyer, which is suspected to be an election violation, the secretary clarified that neither the signature nor the content was familiar, and they had not distributed the flyer. The only item they sent out was a flyer for the speech event to the supporters.

The issue is also that pre-election campaigning is prohibited

The secretary’s response prompted further inquiries in the local area, and multiple testimonies confirmed that the three flyers, including the first one, had been distributed through post and mail to more than just the support group. This contradicts what was stated by the office, showing a clear discrepancy in the accounts.

The three flyers distributed this time have a high likelihood of being election violations, but it’s not uncommon to see borderline flyers and posters. For instance, a dual poster featuring a candidate alongside a prominent politician is a technique used to avoid pre-election campaigning, yet it is essentially an election campaign and not much different. However, many people may wonder, “What exactly is the issue?” In fact, the public election law itself is also criticized in the field of constitutional law. Professor Komatsu, mentioned earlier, states:

“The prohibition of pre-election campaigning and the strict regulations of the Public Election Law restrict freedom of expression and political activity, hindering the interaction between candidates and voters. This regulation itself, in my opinion, is unconstitutional. Japan’s Public Election Law imposes many severe restrictions, such as banning door-to-door visits and limiting the number and types of leaflets and posters. Compared to other countries, Japan’s situation is abnormal. The overly strict nature of Japan’s election law can also be seen as inducing actions that technically avoid the law.”

It is undeniable that the strict regulations of the Public Election Law have created a gray zone for election violations. However, if it is true that Minister Asaou’s office distributed a set of three flyers bearing his name in advance, it would be a clear violation of the rule prohibiting pre-election campaigning. Additionally, from the perspective of election fairness, this could be seen as an act that betrays the trust of the voters.

Professor Komatsu said, “If it is true that the three flyers were distributed, unfortunately, I don’t think Asaou would win if this went to court.”

What is the truth behind the controversy involving a prominent politician in his own hometown?