Press Conference by the Chief Cabinet Secretary (Excerpt)

Q&As

• The issue related to the special intelligence protection bill
• The issue related to the Air Defense Identification Zone established by China

REPORTER: I have a question concerning the special intelligence protection bill. The bill has been voted and adopted by the House of Representatives' Special Committee on National Security, with the approvals of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP), New Komeito and Your Party, which agreed to the revisions. Could I first ask for your thought on this outcome?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: Today the bill was voted and adopted by the House of Representatives' Special Committee on National Security. The bill will now be submitted to the plenary session of the House of Representatives and it is the Government's hope that it will also be approved by the House.

REPORTER: On a related note, I understand that the Japan Restoration Party, which had agreed to revisions and tabled a joint proposal, walked out from the committee meeting today, meaning that the bill was voted in a way that fails to respect the  opinions of the Japan Restoration Party. Could I ask for the reasons behind this outcome and the background?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: As this is a Diet matter, I am not entirely sure of the details, but given that the bill was revised (in accordance with requests), then it would be only common sense to understand that the bill was agreed. It is not the matter to comment from the Government's position besides that. It would be preferable for you to direct your question to the Japan Restoration Party.

REPORTER: This is similar to the previous question. Given the fact that the Japan Restoration Party had agreed to revisions and had tabled a joint proposal, under ordinary circumstances you would expect it to then agree to the revised bill. However, the Japan Restoration Party has stated that there were insufficient deliberations on the bill, which would suggest that if a little more time had been spent it would have been possible to vote the revised bill in an amicable manner. Is there any particular reason behind the timing of the Government and the ruling parties' decision to move to vote the bill?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: By implication, if an agreement is reached regarding revisions, then according to the conditions for adoption, the revised bill would accordingly be agreed.  If an agreement had been reached with regard to revisions, is it not common sense to expect to move to vote the bill?

REPORTER: If I may follow up, are you suggesting that the judgment made by the Japan Restoration Party on this occasion was not grounded in common sense?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: What I am saying is that the discussions to reach agreement on revisions to the bill took a great deal of time, in excess of 40 hours. During the discussions, the respective political parties expressed their approval or rejection on the bill and revised the parts that needed to be revised.. Basically, is it not common sense to assume that if agreement has been reached on revisions, then this agreement has been the outcome of a due process of deliberation? I would assume that is why the members of our ruling parties who were on site moved to vote the revised bill.

REPORTER: You have yourself said that basically the aim is to achieve the passage of the bill during the current session of the Diet. Is it not the case that adoption by the committee was hurried through in view that the end of the current session is drawing close?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I don't think that is the case at all. After all, discussions took place about revisions to the bill and following various discussions on the various points of issue, it was revised accordingly. In that sense, Your Party submitted proposals for revisions some time ago, which were subsequently agreed upon. The Japan Restoration Party also issued proposals for revision and agreed to them. I think therefore that the revisions that were incorporated were as a result of deliberations being finalized on the content of the bill. As such, I believe it to be the case that the members of the ruling parties responsible for coordinating this process in the Diet then moved to vote the bill given that a convergence of opinion had already been reached.

REPORTER: With regard to the special intelligence protection bill its adoption has been steamrolled through the committee. Furthermore, it is also the case that there is still a strong groundswell of opinion among the general public to consider very carefully regarding its passage during the current session of the Diet. What are your frank views about this current state of affairs?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: As I have just noted, the revision process entailed more than 40 hours of deliberations. In the process of those deliberations, each party and faction raised various points of issue. If the deliberations were therefore in any way incomplete, I do not think that they would have resulted in the submission of a revised bill. In fact, each party, including the Democratic Party of Japan, submitted proposals for revision. Once agreement is reached on a bill, the process then moves towards adoption, which is the usual way Diet deliberations are implemented. I believe that today's adoption of the bill was implemented along those lines. The Government hopes that the bill will be subsequently passed by the plenary session of the House of Representatives.

(Abridged)

REPORTER: With regard to the same issue, do you consider that today's adoption of the draft bill was steamrolled through or not?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I do not believe that was the case, because needless to say the ruling parties, and also at the least Your Party expressed their agreement at the committee The Japan Restoration Party had at least indicated its approval of revisions as well. I do not think that such a process could be referred to as steamrolling.

REPORTER: If I may, I understand that, in his responses in the special committee hearing, the Prime Minister expressed a positive view about considerations on a third-party organization that would check the operation of designations on special intelligence. Does this mean that the Government intends to take step forward to deal  this issue prior to the entry the legislation into force? Also, what kind of discussions were the Prime Minister's responses in the Diet based on, and how in-depth were they?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I believe the situation is exactly as the Prime Minister described it in his response to Diet questions. In the event that the bill is passed by the Diet, a preparatory office would be established within the Cabinet Secretariat, which would engage in preparations for the entry into force of the legislation, including the compilation of a first draft of unified standards. Such an office would also launch considerations with regard to measures designed to ensure the appropriate operation of the legislation, based on Supplementary Provision 9. The Prime Minister has made these points clear.

REPORTER: So from what the Prime Minister has said, are we to assume that a third-party organization of some description would be in place by the time the legislation enters into force?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: This was a point that was raised in the course of consultations among the various parties over revisions to the bill and the Prime Minister has responded to questions on this point in the Diet today. I believe it is natural to assume that moves will be made in accordance with the explanation given by the Prime Minister.

REPORTER: So a third-party organization or structure would be in place by the time the legislation entered into force?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I believe the situation would be as explained by the Prime Minister.

REPORTER: On a related note, opposition parties have stated that in public hearings implemented around Japan, there have been cautious opinions expressed about the bill regarding the fact that there has been insufficient time for deliberations even among the participants recommended by the ruling parties themselves. There are some who have also expressed an opinion that further deliberations should be implemented. What are your views on this point?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: We have heard various opinions in the fora of public hearings. The bill was adopted today after having received such inputs from public hearings. I believe that the process has been entirely natural.

(Abridged)

REPORTER: Questions were asked in this morning's press conference with regard to the Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) announced by China. After that, there were press reports that Japan Airlines (JAL) and All Nippon Airways (ANA) are considering abandoning plans to submit their flight plans to the Chinese authorities. In addition, it was reported that Minister Ohta of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism had stated that he understood that airline companies would make the best decision. There are some who question about leaving private sector companies to make a final decision on such a serious matter and whether it is sufficient to call only for self-restraint, given that it could also send out the wrong message to the international community. What are your views on this point?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: First of all, the measures announced by　the Chinese side have no validity whatsoever on Japan and Japan does not accept these measures that impose undue obligations on civil aircraft that fly through the zone. In light of this, the Government has notified the Chinese side that our policy will be to continue to operate according to the existing rules for civil aircraft that fly through the zone. Therefore, given the importance of the government and the private sector making a coordinated response to this matter, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism has once again issued a request for cooperation to respective airline companies, not to submit flight plans to the Chinese authorities.

REPORTER: When was this policy of the Government notified to the Chinese authorities?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: Yesterday the Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs summoned the Ambassador of the People's Republic of China to Japan and notified him of the policy.

REPORTER: On a related to note, are we to understand that with regard to aircraft, both the Government and private sector companies will not concern themselves with the Chinese side's ADIZ?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: Given the necessity of making a coordinated response on this matter, the Government policy has once again been conveyed in writing to airline companies.

REPORTER: Has the same policy been conveyed also to the Chinese side?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: It has already been conveyed to the Chinese side.

REPORTER: Regarding the submission of flight plans, is there any legal basis for requesting private sector companies not to submit flight plans?

(Abridged)

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: The request was made in the form of administrative guidance issued by the Minister of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism.

REPORTER: In the case that a civil aircraft were to encounter trouble, or in the extreme case in which an aircraft were shot down, who would take responsibility for this?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: The Government has not considered such an eventuality at all, as the area in question is one that is used not only by Japanese airlines, but by the aircraft of dozens of global airlines along standard flight routes. Therefore the policy adopted at this time also includes consideration of such internationally-related matters.

REPORTER: So am I correct in understanding that the Government of Japan is expecting Chinese side to take prudent action?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: The Government has already received a response from the Chinese authorities that the measures will not obstruct the freedom of flight for civil aircraft.

(Abridged)

EXECUTIVE SECRETARY: This response was received in the meeting between Vice-Minister for Foreign Affairs Saiki and Mr. Cheng Yonghua, Ambassador of the People's Republic of China to Japan.

REPORTER: On a related topic, in this morning's press conference, you made a reference to the direction for cooperation within the international community on this issue. Has some sort of agreement been reached to ensure that countries concerned take unified and collaborative steps on this matter pertaining also to civil aircraft?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: We are naturally engaged in cooperation with other countries.

REPORTER: Will other countries take the same measures as Japan not to submit flight plans?

CHIEF CABINET SECRETARY SUGA: I believe that almost all countries have not submitted flight plans.

(Abridged)