Introduction
It is essential to recognize that Japan underwent a significant transformation in its economy, politics, legal framework, culture, and society as a direct consequence of World War II. The following analysis will focus narrowly and specifically on the impact of the political-legal environment on WWII and changes directly linked to the conflict, excluding changes that occurred after the war. The primary reason Japan remains the US’s closest ally is that the latter introduced profound changes in how Japan has functioned legally and politically since World War II.
The key implications of the findings are that the United States singlehandedly changed the trajectory of Japan’s political and legal environment from a totalitarian empire to a liberal democracy. Thus, the political and legal systems in a nation can be established in a manner that ensures the victor’s dominance for decades to come.
Thesis: The US occupation of Japan after its defeat jump-started American liberal-democratic political and legal reforms in foundational Japanese legal documents, reducing the Emperor’s powers to ceremonial ones built on the groundwork of Romano-Germanic and Japanese law.
Romano-Germanic and American Laws
American law was applied in all areas of the life of defeated Japan, particularly in the post-war Japanese joint stock law. The Monopoly Act closely mirrored the American antitrust acts and had a significant impact on the field of criminal justice. In the Code of Criminal Procedure of Japan, enacted in 1948, the application of the adversarial principle was expanded, and the institution of a preliminary hearing for cases was introduced. During this period, a set of paramount laws was adopted that regulate social relations to this day, undergoing minor changes.
Despite the total introduction of American law into the Japanese legal system, its influence was not consistent enough. The fact is that most institutions of the main branches of Japanese law have remained rooted in the principles of the Roman-Germanic legal family. In Japanese law, the main features of the Romano-Germanic family are both the very content of positive law and the system of sources of Japanese law, the main element of which is codified legislation. Post-war Japanese law actually represented a synthesis of Western legal systems. Purely Japanese norms in the country’s legal system were minimized.
In Japan, a codified system has been preserved, mainly consisting of six codes. Judicial precedent, as a characteristic element of the American legal system, has not been established as a source of Japanese law. Thus, the impact of World War II on the state and legal development of Japan was colossal.
Japan turned from a conquering power into a defeated country, in which all state power was, in fact, in the hands of the American occupying forces (Tanaka 55). The Japanese state was compelled to adopt the American liberal-democratic path. However, in the Japanese legal system, American law, which, although it had a significant influence, was synthesized with the already existing Romano-Germanic and Japanese law.
Parliament and the Supreme Court
The supreme legislative body was a bicameral parliament consisting of the House of Representatives and the House of Councilors. The first chamber was elected for a four-year term, and the second for a six-year term; however, Parliament was limited in its power. For example, the Supreme Court of Japan could declare a law passed by Parliament unconstitutional (Chen 78). Even the Emperor could dissolve the House of Representatives at the request of the Cabinet.
The Cabinet of Ministers, headed by the prime minister, elected by the Parliament, was proclaimed the supreme executive body of power. The Emperor had to formally approve the chosen candidate for Prime Minister, who then appointed the rest of the ministers. The Cabinet of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Parliament that actually elected it. In the event of a vote of no confidence, the government must either resign or dissolve the House of Representatives by asking the Emperor to do so.
The supreme judiciary is represented by the Supreme Court, whose judges are appointed by the Cabinet for 10-year terms. The Supreme Court, to determine the constitution’s conformity, carried out the verification of laws and other acts. The lower-level judicial bodies were called courts of summary proceedings.
Article 9 of the 1947 Constitution declared Japan’s renunciation of war and the threat or use of armed force as a means of settling international disputes (Yamamoto et al. 142). In the criminal legislation, the Law of 1947 excluded crimes against the imperial house, abolished family moral crimes and violations of marital fidelity, but introduced severe punishments for war crimes and crimes against peace and humanity (Chen 241). Later, this made it possible to start trials against war criminals in Japan.
American Influence
The American occupation authorities rejected the draft of the new Japanese constitution, which was, in fact, a reworked version of the old 1889 constitution. The US imposed its own draft, which, of course, was based on the US Constitution as a model. Thus, in accordance with the American model, the Constitution of Japan provided for the institution of constitutional supervision.
Since the Constitution of 1947 does not define the form of government, the presence of hereditary imperial power and a special mechanism for the interaction between the Parliament and the Cabinet of Ministers provide grounds to define this form as a parliamentary monarchy (Hata et al. 124). The Emperor, although he formally remained the ruler of Japan, was significantly limited in his rights. He had the right to appoint the prime minister and supreme judges, promulgate laws, convene and dissolve Parliament, and approve the highest state appointments to posts. Thus, the powers of the Emperor were significantly limited by law, Parliament, and the Cabinet of Ministers.
After Japan’s defeat in World War II, it lost the opportunity to independently determine the vector of its development for an extended period, as the victorious states set the task of eliminating the possibility of Japanese militarism’s revival. The radical restructuring of the state carried out through reforms took place, among other things, for this purpose. The leading role in the development of these reforms was played by the United States, which was directly interested in turning Japan from an enemy into a country that shares American values and is an ally. It was necessary to create a solid democratic foundation in the country. The reforms carried out in Japan were aimed at profound democratization (Hata et al. 205).
During the process of modernization, it was necessary to eliminate those features that had enabled the establishment of an authoritarian paramilitary regime. At the same time, the Japanese government lacked the authority to independently establish and maintain diplomatic relations with other states, and Japan’s foreign policy functions were under the control of the occupation authorities.
WWII as a Foundation of Modern Japan
For Japan, this defeat meant not just a crisis of statehood but its practical destruction. In Japan, occupied by American troops, all state powers were transferred to the commander-in-chief of the US troops, under whom an Advisory Council was established with representatives from the USSR, Great Britain, and China. There was also a control body, known as the Far Eastern Commission, in which representatives from 11 countries that had defeated Japan were already participating.
The foundations of Japan’s post-war structure were predetermined by the Potsdam Declaration of the victorious powers on July 26, 1945. According to the Declaration, Japan was demilitarized, which meant that it was deprived of its army and all military structures (Tanaka 86). In October 1945, the American headquarters issued an order to restore all democratic rights and freedoms in Japan.
Later, in December 1945, universal suffrage was proclaimed, which applied equally to both men and women, and it took effect at the age of 20 (Hata et al. 174). The American authorities initiated the revival of multi-party political life in Japan. The process progressed rapidly, such that by 1947, there were more than 120 political parties and associations in Japan (Hata et al. 55). Among these were the revived Socialist and Communist parties.
World War II also had a significant impact on the political landscape, as the US, which emerged victorious, subsequently became a superpower. United States-led Allied forces controlled the country after Japan’s capitulation in 1945, marking the end of World War II and bringing about significant changes (Chong and Li 200). Japan’s Empire was dismantled, it became a democracy, and it rebuilt its economy and educational system. Moreover, Japanese colonies in East Asia, such as South Korea, China, and the Philippines, regained their independence after the United States oversaw the defeat of the Japanese, ending World War II.
Conclusion
The American victory over Japan at the end of World War II initiated sweeping liberal-democratic reforms in Japan’s fundamental political and legal structures. These changes, grounded in existing Japanese and Romano-Germanic law, dramatically curtailed the Emperor’s authority to a merely ceremonial role. Politically, the war resulted in the dissolution of the Japanese Empire, causing Japan to lose all its colonial territories, such as South Korea.
Overall, World War II marked a profound shift, transforming Japan from a stable, independent nation into a devastated one. These observations highlight how the United States successfully re-engineered Japan’s political and legal environment, switching it from a totalitarian regime to a liberal democracy. This demonstrates that a victorious power can implement legal changes that ensure its dominance over the defeated nation for many decades.
The lasting legal and political modifications introduced by the US after the war are the primary reason Japan remains its staunchest ally today. Therefore, further study is necessary to explore the specific legal mechanisms and frameworks superpowers use to maintain the allegiance and partnership of their defeated allies over extended periods.
Works Cited
Chen, Albert. Public Law in East Asia. Routledge, 2017.
Chong, Terence Tai Leung, and Xiaoyang Li. “Understanding the China-US Trade War: Causes, Economic Impact, and the Worst-Case Scenario.” Economic and Political Studies, vol. 7, no. 2, 2019, pp. 185-202.
Hata, Hiroyuki, et al. Constitutional Law in Japan. Wolters Kluwer, 2022.
Tanaka, Yuki. Hidden Horrors: Japanese War Crimes in World War II. Routledge, 2019.
Yamamoto, Eric K., et al. Race, Rights, and Reparations: Law and the Japanese American Incarceration. Aspen Publishing, 2021.