Global Integrity Report

Japan Home

Facts

Timeline

Notebook

Integrity Scorecard

2007 Assessment

Japan: Integrity Indicators Scorecard

Japan: Integrity Scorecard Report > Sub-Category: Civil Society Organizations
Indicators		Score
1	Are anti-corruption/good governance CSOs legally protected?	67
2	Are good governance/anti-corruption CSOs able to operate freely?	83
3	Are civil society activists safe when working on corruption issues?	100
4	Can citizens organize into trade unions?	100

Indicator and sub-Indicator Details

Are anti-corruption/good governance CSOs legally protected?

1a: In law, citizens have a right to form civil society organizations (CSOs) focused on anti-corruption or good governance.

Score:

YES

Comments: Freedom to assemble into groups promoting anti-corruption or good governance is protected by the Constitution of Japan, regardless of political ideology, religion or objectives.

References: Article 21 of the Constitution: "Freedom of assembly and association as well as speech, press and all other forms of expression are guaranteed.

"No censorship shall be maintained, nor shall the secrecy of any means of communication be violated."

1b: In law, anti-corruption/good governance CSOs are free to accept funding from any foreign or domestic sources.

Score:

YES

Comments: Anti-corruption/good governance CSOs face no legal or regulatory restrictions to raise or accept funds from any foreign or domestic sources. However, it is extremely difficult for anti-corruption CSOs to raise funding in practice from domestic sources such as enterprises in Japan.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

1c: In law, anti-corruption/good governance CSOs are required to disclose their sources of funding.

Score:

YES

Comments: No such public disclosure requirement exists except for reports of activities, BS/PL and names of directors, etc.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

Are good governance/anti-corruption CSOs able to operate freely?

2a: In practice, the government does not create barriers to the organization of new anti-corruption/good governance CSOs.

Score:

100

Comments: CSOs focused on promoting good governance or anti-corruption can freely organize with no interaction with the government, other than voluntary registration. However, the government does not support these CSOs at all.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

Peer Review Comments: The Law to Promote Specified Nonprofit Activities, which was promulgated in 1999, provides the legal basis for nonprofit organizations in Japan. One important point is that there are no tax concessions for individuals' donations to NPOs. It is not just that the government itself provides little support for NPOs; it also does not make it easier for other people to support them.

2b: In practice, anti-corruption/good governance CSOs actively engage in the political and policymaking process.

Score:

100

Comments: Those CSOs are willing to articulate opinions on political matters, but have little access to decision makers. Their financial base is so weak that they can not have any paid staff, and their power is limited to some extent.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

2c: In practice, no anti-corruption/good governance CSOs have been shut down by the government for their work on corruption-related issues during the study period.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned is there were no CSOs shut down by the government or forced to cease operations because of their work on corruption-related issues during the study period. NO: A NO score is earned if any CSO has been effectively shut down by the government or forced to cease operations because of its work on corruption-related issues during the study period. The causal relationship between the cessation of operations and the CSO\'s work may not be explicit, however the burden of proof here is low. If it seems likely that the CSO was forced to cease operations due to its work, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments: No CSOs has ever been shut down by the government or forced to cease operations because of their work on corruption-related issues.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

Are civil society activists safe when working on corruption issues?

3a: In practice, in the past year, no civil society activists working on corruption issues have been imprisoned.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no CSO activists imprisoned because of their work covering corruption. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if any activist was jailed in relation to work covering corruption. The causal relationship between the official charges and the person\'s work may not be explicit, however the burden of proof here is low. If it seems likely that the person was imprisoned due to his or her work, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments: There is no CSO activist imprisoned because of their work covering corruption.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

3b: In practice, in the past year, no civil society activists working on corruption issues have been physically harmed.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no documented cases of CSO activists covering corruption being assaulted in the specific study period. A YES score can be earned if there was an attack but it was clearly unrelated to the activist\'s work. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if there were any documented cases during the study period of assault to an activist who covers corruption. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments: There is no documented case of CSO activists covering corruption being assaulted in the past.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

3c: In practice, in the past year, no civil society activists working on corruption issues have been killed.

Score:

YES

$Scoring Criteria :: YES: A YES score is earned if there were no documented cases of CSO activists being killed because of their work covering corruption in the specific study period. YES is a positive score. NO: A NO score is earned if there were any documented cases during the study period where a person was killed related to a corruption trial, scandal or investigation. The relationship between a mysterious death and an individual\'s history may not be clear, however the burden of proof here is low. If it is reasonable that a person was killed in relation to his or her work on corruption issues, then the indicator is scored as a NO. Corruption is defined broadly to include any abuses of power, not just the passing of bribes.$

Comments: There is no documented case of CSO activists being killed because of their work covering corruption in the past.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

Can citizens organize into trade unions?

4a: In law, citizens have a right to organize into trade unions.

Score:

YES

Comments: Trade unions are allowed by the Constitution of Japan, regardless of political ideology, religion or objectives.

References: Article 28 of the Constitution: The right of workers to organize and to bargain and act collectively is guaranteed.

4b: In practice, citizens are able to organize into trade unions.

Score:

100

Comments: Trade unions are common and are an important part of the political process and political discourse.

References: Interviews with board member of Transparency International Japan.

Peer Review Comments: Trade unions play an important role in negotiations on wages and working conditions within individual companies in the industrial sector. However, trade union membership has declined since the 1980s, and unions do not currently play a major role in the formulation of policy at the national level.