Political Risk:

Moderate

Score:

65/100

Defence and Security Policy and Policy Transparency

Collapse
Q1 100/100

Is there formal provision for effective and independent legislative scrutiny of defence policy?

View Question
Formal rights Score: 100 / 100
The Diet is “the sole law-making organ of State,” and therefore has the right to enact laws. Both houses of the Diet must act…
Explore
Effectiveness Score: 100 / 100
Ultimately, the cabinet must have the confidence of the House of Representatives in conducting all affairs of state. [1] As Kishimoto writes, “the House…
Explore
Independent legislature scrutiny Score: 100 / 100
The Cabinet depends on a majority of the Diet voting in favour of its proposals for them to be adopted. It will attempt to…
Explore
Q2 71/100

Does the country have an identifiable and effective parliamentary defence and security committee (or similar such organisations) to exercise oversight?

View Question
Formal rights Score: 100 / 100
The Security Committee of the House of Representatives and the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee of the House of Councillors handle defence affairs. These…
Explore
Expertise Score: 75 / 100
The Diet Law states that “Members of Standing Committees shall be appointed by each House at the beginning of a session, and shall hold…
Explore
Responsive policymaking Score: 100 / 100
The topics raised in the committees are found on their homepages. Bills and budget proposals are dealt with by the committees. The Cabinet issues…
Explore
Short-term oversight Score: 25 / 100
The Security Committee of the House of Representatives met 11 times from March 5 to June 26, 2019, a period covering 17 weeks, [1]…
Explore
Long-term oversight Score: 50 / 100
As noted in Q2B, each Standing Committee may have an official with professional knowledge (a “Senmon-in” or Professional Adviser), and researchers. Both the Security…
Explore
Institutional outcomes Score: 75 / 100
The Diet committees with jurisdiction over defence seldom make recommendation to the Ministry of Defence (see Q2D). If “recommendation” is interpreted as “request”, however,…
Explore
Q3 69/100

Is the country’s national defence policy or national security strategy debated and publicly available?

View Question
Scope of involvement Score: 75 / 100
The executive contributes to debate on defence policy by making policy documents accessible, such as the National Security Strategy (adopted in 2013), the National…
Explore
Scope of debate Score: 75 / 100
While a few topics of general interest are debated during election campaigns, some topics are mostly discussed by decision makers and experts. Content analysis…
Explore
Public consultations Score: 50 / 100
Diet committees can arrange public consultations on defence policy or the security strategy. They can hold public hearings at the national and local level…
Explore
Transparency Score: 75 / 100
Important government documents on Japan’s defence policy are publicly available and easily accessible. This is the case for the government documents listed in the…
Explore
Q4 50/100

Do defence and security institutions have a policy, or evidence, of openness towards civil society organisations (CSOs) when dealing with issues of corruption?

View Question
Policy of openness Score: 0 / 100
No formally stated Japanese policy of openness specific to CSOs was found. Japan does, however, have a Freedom of Information Act. Transparency International Japan,…
Explore
CSO protections Score: 75 / 100
The Constitution of Japan guarantees freedom of assembly, association, speech, press and all other forms of expression. [1] Furthermore, as one interviewee explained, “if…
Explore
Practice of openness Score: 75 / 100
Defence and security institutions have worked with CSOs. One example is a call for applications from CSOs for a project where they would work…
Explore
Q5 75/100

Has the country signed up to the following international anti-corruption instruments: UNCAC and the OECD Convention?

View Question
Signatory and Ratification status Score: 100 / 100
Japan signed the United Nations Convention Against Corruption in December 2003, and in 2006 the National Diet of Japan gave approval of its ratification…
Explore
Compliance Score: 50 / 100
The OECD recently (July 2019) stated that, “Japan continues to demonstrate a particularly low level of anti-bribery enforcement. Since 1999, it has only prosecuted…
Explore
Q6 75/100

Is there evidence of regular, active public debate on issues of defence? If yes, does the government participate in this debate?

View Question
Public debate Score: 75 / 100
Several media channels broadcast debates on defence issues. The public viewing fee funded broadcaster NHK’s weekly television program “NHK Sunday Debate” often raises such…
Explore
Government engagement in public discourse Score: 75 / 100
The government contributes to debate on defence policy by making policy documents. [1] Furthermore, the Minister of Defence gives interviews which are posted on…
Explore
Q7 0/100

Does the country have an openly stated and effectively implemented anti-corruption policy for the defence sector?

View Question
Anti-corruption policy Score: 0 / 100
This indicator is marked ‘Not Applicable’ as there is no anti-corruption policy that applies to the defence sector. A search of the webpages of…
Explore
Effective implementation Score: NA / 100
The Ministry of Defence of Japan does not have an explicit anti-corruption policy (see Q7A), neither does an explicit action plan seem to exist.…
Explore
Q8 83/100

Are there independent, well-resourced, and effective institutions within defence and security tasked with building integrity and countering corruption?

View Question
Mandate and resources Score: 75 / 100
The primary responsibility for dealing with legal compliance within the Ministry of Defence and the SDF lies with the Inspector General’s Office of Legal…
Explore
Independence Score: 100 / 100
The IGO is an independent office in the MOD under the direct supervision of the Minister of Defence. The Inspector General is to submit…
Explore
Effectiveness Score: 75 / 100
The IGO publishes an annual report on its regular inspections. In its report for the fiscal year 2018, it wrote that it was working…
Explore
Q9 NS/100

Does the public trust the institutions of defence and security to tackle the issue of bribery and corruption in their establishments?

View Question
Score: NS / 100
This indicator is not assigned a score in the GDI. No public polls directly asking whether there is public trust in the ability of…
Explore
Q10 33/100

Are there regular assessments of the areas of greatest corruption risk for ministry and armed forces personnel, and are the findings used as inputs to the anti-corruption policy?

View Question
Risk assessments Score: 50 / 100
Beginning in January 2006, some executive civil servants in the Japanese Ministry of Defence (MOD) were arrested and prosecuted by the Tokyo District Prosecutor’s…
Explore
Regularity Score: 0 / 100
Information on the webpages of the Japan Ministry of Defence (see Q10A) indicate that a thorough assessment of the corruption risk was made following…
Explore
Inputs to anti-corruption policy Score: 50 / 100
The assessment of the 2006 collusion incident was justification for the establishment of an Inspector General’s Office in 2007. [1,2] The Ministry of Defence…
Explore

Defence Budgets

Expand
Q11 67/100

Does the country have a process for acquisition planning that involves clear oversight, and is it publicly available?

View Question
Acquisition planning process Score: 75 / 100
The broad outlines of the acquisition planning cycle are clear. The “Medium Term Defence Program” is an acquisition plan for a five-year period. [1]…
Explore
Transparency Score: 50 / 100
The public has access to documents from the whole procurement process. The NSS, [1] NDPG, [2] and Medium Term Defence Program [3] can all…
Explore
External oversight Score: 75 / 100
A Medium Term Defence Program (MTDP) acquisition plan covering FY 2019 – FY 2023, as well as National Defence Program Guidelines (NDPG) for FY…
Explore
Q12 100/100

Is the defence budget transparent, showing key items of expenditure? And it is provided to the legislature in a timely fashion?

View Question
Comprehensiveness Score: 100 / 100
Different versions of the Japanese budget are released at different stages of the budget compilation process, but almost every item of expenditure is listed…
Explore
Timeliness Score: 100 / 100
The budget proposal that the Finance Minister presents to the National Diet for legislative scrutiny will have the government’s support and will only be…
Explore
Q13 75/100

Is there a legislative committee (or other appropriate body) responsible for defence budget scrutiny and analysis in an effective way?

View Question
Formal rights Score: 100 / 100
The Security Committee of the House of Representatives and the Foreign Affairs and Defence Committee of the House of Councillors are standing committees in…
Explore
Influence on decision-making Score: 50 / 100
The Constitution grants the authority to make the budget proposal to the Executive. [1] The budget proposal that the government presents to the Diet…
Explore
Q14 92/100

Is the approved defence budget made publicly available? In practice, can citizens, civil society, and the media obtain detailed information on the defence budget?

View Question
Proactive publication Score: 100 / 100
According to Article 91 of the Japanese Constitution, “At regular intervals and at least annually the Cabinet shall report to the Diet and the…
Explore
Comprehensiveness Score: 100 / 100
The entire defence budget that has been approved by the National Diet is uploaded on MOD’s website. This includes a full breakdown of the…
Explore
Response to information requests Score: 75 / 100
The public may apply for additional information under “The Act on Access to Information Held by Administrative Organs.” The Ministry of Internal Affairs and…
Explore
Q15 75/100

Are sources of defence income other than from central government allocation (from equipment sales or property disposal, for example) published and scrutinised?

View Question
Transparency Score: 100 / 100
The general account budget, of which the Defence Budget is a part, is to be funded primarily by taxes and public bonds. [1] The…
Explore
Institutional scrutiny Score: 75 / 100
The Board of Audit of Japan is independent of the Executive and is in charge of auditing government expenditure. [1] It publishes an annual…
Explore
Public scrutiny Score: 50 / 100
Aside from small amounts of income from sales of used military equipment and military property assets, no indications were found of non-central government sources…
Explore
Q16 NEI/100

Is there an effective internal audit process for defence ministry expenditure (that is, for example, transparent, conducted by appropriately skilled individuals, and subject to parliamentary oversight)?

View Question
Activity Score: NEI / 100
Ministry of Defence (MOD) instructions on internal audit are clear, but little information has been found on relevant homepages on the level of this…
Explore
Enabling oversight Score: 0 / 100
An Internet search for information on enabling oversight of the internal audit of defence spending found no information on such oversight in the mainstream…
Explore
External scrutiny Score: NEI / 100
There is not enough information to score this indicator. The MOD Instructions on Audit Inspection, which give the rules for internal audit, also refer…
Explore
Institutional outcomes Score: NEI / 100
There is not enough information to score this indicator. The MOD Instructions on Audit Inspection entitle the Minister or a Chief of Staff to…
Explore
Q17 88/100

Is there effective and transparent external auditing of military defence expenditure?

View Question
Activity Score: 75 / 100
The Board of Audit of Japan plays a major role in providing oversight of government expenditures. It conducts external audits of the defence sector,…
Explore
Independence Score: 75 / 100
The Board of Audit is the primary external auditor for military spending. It is independent of the Executive with regard to the appointment of…
Explore
Transparency Score: 100 / 100
The Board of Audit regularly publishes reports from its audits. It publishes its reports within a reasonable timeframe. Its audit report for FY2017 was…
Explore
Institutional outcomes Score: 100 / 100
The Board of Audit regularly publishes information on its website about improvement measures taken by government agencies based on the board’s recommendations. For example,…
Explore

Nexus of Defence and National Assets

Expand
Q18 67/100

Is there evidence that the country’s defence institutions have controlling or financial interests in businesses associated with the country’s natural resource exploitation and, if so, are these interests publicly stated and subject to scrutiny?

View Question
Legal framework Score: 0 / 100
A comprehensive and extensive book on the Japanese legal system by Jones and Ravitch from 2020 does not describe any statutory or constitutional instruments…
Explore
Defence institutions: Financial or controlling interests in practice Score: 100 / 100
There is no evidence that Japanese defence institutions are involved in businesses relating to the country’s natural resource exploitation. No reports of such exploitation…
Explore
Individual defence personnel: Financial or controlling interests in practice Score: 100 / 100
There is no indication that SDF personnel are involved in illegal businesses relating to the country’s natural resource exploitation. In a search of the…
Explore
Transparency Score: NA / 100
The homepages of the Ministry of Defence [1] and the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy [2] as well as of the mainstream national…
Explore
Scrutiny Score: NA / 100
The homepages of the Ministry of Defence [1] and the Agency for Natural Resources and Energy [2] as well as of the mainstream national…
Explore

Organised Crime

Expand
Q19 100/100

Is there evidence, for example through media investigations or prosecution reports, of a penetration of organised crime into the defence and security sector? If no, is there evidence that the government is alert and prepared for this risk?

View Question
Penetration of organised crime Score: 100 / 100
No media reports nor any other evidence could be found of a penetration of organised crime into the defence and security sector in Japan.…
Explore
Government response Score: 100 / 100
A few government institutions have a responsibility for responding to organised crime in Japan. Such crime falls primarily within the responsibilities of the police,…
Explore
Q20 92/100

Is there policing to investigate corruption and organised crime within the defence services and is there evidence of the effectiveness of this policing?

View Question
Existence of policing function Score: 75 / 100
The military police (警務) exist in all service branches of the Self-Defence Force (SDF). They have the mandate to operate as police as described…
Explore
Independence Score: 100 / 100
The military police force is under the direct command of the Minister of Defence, and therefore has a degree of independence vis-à-vis the SDF.…
Explore
Effectiveness Score: 100 / 100
In a search of the webpages of the mainstream newspapers Asahi and Yomiuri, several cases of corruption were found, but none involving the highest…
Explore

Control of Intelligence Services

Expand
Q21 13/100

Are the policies, administration, and budgets of the intelligence services subject to effective and independent oversight?

View Question
Independence Score: 25 / 100
Two pieces of legislation passed by the Japanese Diet in 2013 substantially reorganised the country’s intelligence services. An earlier law was revised to establish…
Explore
Effectiveness Score: 0 / 100
The Japanese organisations that are closest to being parliamentary oversight committees for the intelligence services are the Information Oversight Committees of the two Houses…
Explore
Q22 25/100

Are senior positions within the intelligence services filled on the basis of objective selection criteria, and are appointees subject to investigation of their suitability and prior conduct?

View Question
Objective selection criteria Score: 0 / 100
The Japanese intelligence institutions are headed by civil servants or Self-Defence Force (SDF) officials. The Secretary General of the National Security Secretariat (NSS) and…
Explore
Selection bias Score: 50 / 100
The government of Prime Minister Abe, which lasted from 2012 to 2020, increased the intervention by the Prime Minister’s Office into the appointment of…
Explore
Vetting process Score: 25 / 100
Criteria for assessing the suitability of candidates to head NSS and CIRO were not found on the webpages of the Cabinet Secretariat, to which…
Explore

Export Controls

Expand
Q23 75/100

Does the government have a well-scrutinised process for arms export decisions that aligns with Articles 7.1.iv, 11.5, and 15.6 of the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT)?

View Question
Signatory and Ratification Score: 100 / 100
Japan signed the Arms Trade Treaty on June 3, 2013 [1] and ratified it on May 9, 2014. [2] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs…
Explore
Compliance Score: 75 / 100
The Three Principles on Transfer of Defence Equipment and Technology adopted by the Government of Japan in 2014 [1] have implications for the status…
Explore
Parliamentary scrutiny Score: 50 / 100
The National Security Council (NSC) and Japanese Cabinet approved three principles on the transfer of defence equipment and technology in 2014. The first principle…
Explore

Lobbying in Defence

Expand
Q76 0/100

Does the country regulate lobbying of defence institutions?

View Question
Legal framework Score: 0 / 100
The Japan Business Federation, generally considered the most influential business federation in Japan, frequently writes in its newsletter Approaches to Current Issues that it…
Explore
Disclosure: Public officials Score: NA / 100
Japan has no specific lobbying legislation and the legislation that exists on undue influence is interpreted in such a way that public officials in…
Explore
Lobbyist registration system Score: NA / 100
As Japan does not have legislation regulating lobbying and has no registration requirements for lobbyists, this indicator is marked Not Applicable. [1] However, Japan…
Explore
Oversight & enforcement Score: NA / 100
This indicator is marked Not Applicable as Japan does not have legislation that regulates lobbying in the defence sector. The only exception are rules…
Explore