Through the circumstances of argument which has so far been described, the prefecture system is again located in the core of local-government-system argument. In this section, I want to consider the possibility of realizing a state regional system and merger of prefectures theory, both of which are argued vigorously recent years, and the "viewpoint" where examining "the future of the prefecture system," after summarizing how much the prefecture system can be reformed under the present constitution and what thing is in the argument of the prefecture system reform including reexamination of the constitution.

　

The following two points can be mentioned as the points of argument involving the relation between the framework of the prefecture system itself and the Constitution of Japan.

Is the existence of the prefectures secured on the constitution? (Do you have to revise the constitution when taking a state regional system etc,.?)

When "the main object of local autonomy" set to Article 92 of the Constitution of Japan is taken into consideration, are some wide area local authorities, such as prefectures and state-regions other than basic local units, necessities? (Is a two-tiered system a constitutional request? In order to adopt a one tiered system, is it necessary to revise the constitution?)

　

About the point of , there are the following three views.

As for a) theory, it is clear that the greatest main point of reform about a local autonomy system after the second world war was embodying perfect self-governing body by direct public election of the governors of prefectures, but that does not necessarily show that the existence of prefectures itself is immediately secured on the constitution. Moreover, considering the fact that prefectures and municipalities were being clearly specified in the establishment process of Article 93 of the constitution temporarily, it is gentler to consider the existence of general local authorities as a candidate for security of the constitution. Therefore, a) is not necessarily considered to be persuasive.

Although b) theory and c) theory are not necessarily contradictory, after all, it can be said that c) theory is a most comprehensive and appropriate view. It is because it is clear that the legislation which conflicts with "the main object of local autonomy" is unconstitutional.

Moreover, about the point of argument, there is a view of regarding the two-tiered structure of municipalities and prefectures as a constitutional request from the viewpoint of the necessity for the wide area unit between the country and municipalities, the viewpoint of the continuation from the Meiji era and the viewpoint of the compatibility with the liberal-like and decentralization-oriented request from the constitution.

However, logically speaking, realization of the main object of local autonomy is not necessarily connected with two-tiered structure. In addition, the "special municipality" system provided from the time of the Local Autonomy Law establishment in Showa 22 (1947) to Showa 31 (1956) prescribed making a special municipality into the outside of the zone of prefectures on the Local Autonomy Law. This shows that we stand on the premise that we can adopt the so called one-tiered system under the current constitution. In examining the prefecture system, we should take into account the fact that local autonomy has been secured by establishing wider area local authorities as well as basic local units.

Moreover, although the so-called "federal system" is used ambiguously in practice, basically, it is the national form that the "country" which has sovereignty, respectively transfers a part of the authority to the federal government fundamentally. Therefore, the change of constitution will be needed if we adopt the federal system.

In addition, mergers or unions of prefectures do not bring the unconstitutional problem immediately. However, when they are compulsorily performed on law, there may be the problem of the constitutionality of a compulsory merger related to the main object of local autonomy.

Moreover, In the last report(June 14, Heisei 13) of the Decentralization Promoting Committee, it indicates that "we should deepen examination further about the justice of various proposals about a new local autonomy system such as the state regional system theory, the federal system theory and the Haiken-Chihan theory, currently made in every direction from the viewpoint of revising the present two-tiered system," and furthermore, it pointed out that "various proposals about a new local autonomy system which refers to not only municipalities but also prefectures may be tinctured more with actuality," which depends on the progress of merger of municipalities from now on.

Also, the following activities are made among prefectures.

Many Prefectures other than these prefectures set a study group about the state of prefectures a state region theory and so on. Meanwhile, the following arrangement about the argument related to mergers of prefectures, a state region system and so forth was performed in the 27th Local Government System Research Council that had taken up determined "the state of prefectures" as a formal subject of argument.

　

Merger of Prefectures and a State Regional System, etc,.

　

The State of Reorganization

　

The prefecture system which was extremely stabilized and established is mobilizing now. However, that is never a strange thing nor what should be pessimistic of as seen so far. The prefecture system is said to be "on the very delicate balance between principle and actuality". Therefore, "a change of the system may become the cause to break down this balance. The fundamental reexamination of the delegated function system may be one of such the causes. "The delegated function system was abolished and we are exposed to the rapid change of society such as arrival of rapid progress of a less children aged society and population reduction society. The needs to administration also change. It is rather nonsense to think that we can cope with a situation without changing a system at all.

Hence, it is not necessary to fear a change. On the other hand, it is important to consider that an administration system affects many people. As the prefecture system has played a big and stable role for people for a long time, we should think about an influence of prefectures' change deliberately.

Then, a "viewpoint" and a "compass" for examination are needed. They are related to the question about what the purpose of prefectures or general administration subjects is. It is needless to say that the purpose of an administration subject is improvement in the welfare of people. Prefectures, municipalities and the country exist to construct the community in which people can feel comfortable as a result of paying a tax and receiving administration service.

They are only the tool for the purpose if I say without fearing misapprehension. Supposing that is right, it is the starting point of an argument to think of what role prefectures (or administration subjects over wide area) bear. There is not necessarily a framework theory previously. And in order to discern the function and role which prefectures should play, arrangement of the relation among prefectures, small-scale municipalities and big cities will be the indispensable premise. If exact execution of administration is secured for residents, it is the secondary problem who provides administration service.

While expecting that a fruitful argument takes place in every direction from now on, I want to continue an argument and an effort towards realization of a new prefecture system and new local autonomy.