This article presents Minobe Tatsukichi’s emperor organ theory as a novel understanding of the temporality of founding. In contrast to a conventional framework of founding which legitimizes the constitution by postulating the pre-constitutional power of “the people,” emperor organ theory invents “the people” out of the Meiji Constitution as a democratically empowered subject to-come. In so doing, emperor organ theory calls upon the transformation of shin-min (臣民), the presumed subject of the emperor, into koku-min (国民), the people of this constitutional state. However, emperor organ theory also highlights the contingency of founding moments: though koku-min emerged through the Diet as a conceptually new political actor in Japan’s nascent constitutional state, it never solidified its sovereign status as “the people.”
AkitaG (1967) Foundations of Constitutional Government in Modern Japan, 1868–1900.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University Press.
2.
AratoA (2006)
Post-sovereign constitution making and its pathology in Iraq.New York Law School Law Review51(3): 535–556.
3.
AratoA (2009)
Redeeming the still redeemable: Post sovereign constitution making.International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society22(4): 427–443.
4.
AratoA (2016) Post Sovereign Constitution Making: Learning and Legitimacy.
Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
5.
AratoA (2017) The Adventures of the Constituent Power: Beyond Revolutions?
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
BeckmannGM (1957) The Making of the Meiji Constitution: The Oligarchs and the Constitutional Development of Japan, 1868–1891.
Lawrence, KS:
University of Kansas Publications.
8.
BernalAM (2017) Beyond Origins: Rethinking Founding in a Time of Constitutional Democracy.
New York:
Oxford University Press.
9.
BurtscherM (2012)
A nation and a people? Notes toward a conceptual history of the terms minzoku 民族 and kokumin 國民 in early Meiji Japan.Journal of Political Science and Sociology16(5): 47–106.
10.
ChambersS (2004)
Democracy, popular sovereignty, and constitutional legitimacy.Constellations11(2): 153–173.
11.
ChambersS (2018) Kickstarting the bootstrapping: Jürgen Habermas, deliberative constitutionalisation and the limits of proceduralism. In: LevyR,KongH,OrrGKingJ (eds) Cambridge Handbook of Deliberative Constitutionalism.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 256–372.
12.
ColegroveK (1937)
The Japanese constitution.American Political Science Review31: 1027–1049.
13.
Colón-RíosJ (2009)
The end of the constitutionalism-democracy debate.Comparative Research in Law & Political Economy Research Paper3: 1–37.
14.
Colón-RíosJ (2010)
The legitimacy of the juridical: Constituent power, democracy, and the limits of constitutional reform.Osgoode Hall Law Journal48(2): 199–246.
DerridaJ (1986)
Declarations of independence.New Political Science7(1): 7–15.
17.
DischL (2012)
Democratic representation and the constituency paradox.Perspectives on Politics10: 599–616.
18.
DoakMK (2006) A History of Nationalism in Modern Japan: Placing the People.
Boston, MA:
Brill.
19.
EmuraE (ed.) (1995) Jiyu minken to meiji kenpo [The Freedom and People’s Rights Movement and the Meiji Constitution].
Tokyo:
Yoshikawa Kobunkan.
20.
FurukawaE (2011) Minobe Tatsukichi to Yoshino Sakuzō: Taishō demokurashī o michibiita Teidai kyōju [Minobe Tatsukichi and Yoshino Sakuzō: The Leaders of Taishō Democracy at the Imperial University].
Tokyo:
Yamakawa Shuppansha.
21.
HabermasJ (2001)
Constitutional democracy: A paradoxical union of contradictory principles?Political Theory29(6): 766–781.
22.
HahmCKimSH (2015) Making We the People: Democratic Constitutional Founding in Postwar Japan and South Korea.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
23.
IenagaS (1964) Minobe Tatsukichi No Shisōshi Teki Kenkyū [The Study of Minobe Tatsukichi’s Legal Thought].
Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten.
24.
IenagaS (1967) Nihon Kindai Kenpō Shisōshi Kenkyū [The Study of Japan’s Modern Constitution].
Tokyo:
Iwanami Shoten.
25.
IenagaS,EmuraEShōzōM (eds.) (2005) Shinpen meiji zenki no kenpō kōsō [Constitutional Thought in the Pre-Meiji Era].
Tokyo:
Fukumura Shuppan.
26.
ItōH (1906) Commentaries on the Constitution of the Empire of Japan. Translated by I Miyoji. Tokyo: Chūō Daigaku.
27.
ItōY (2009) Itō Hirobumi: Kindai Nihon wo tsukkuta otoko [Itō Hirobumi, the Man Who Created Modern Japan]. Tokyo: Kōdansha.
28.
JellinekG (1901) The Declaration of the Rights of Man and of Citizens: A Contribution to Modern Constitutional History. Translated by M Farrand. New York: Henry Holt.
29.
JencoLK (2010) Making the Political: Founding and Action in the Political Theory of Zhang Shizhao.
Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
30.
KalyvasA (2005)
Popular sovereignty, democracy, and the constituent power.Constellations12(2): 223–244.
31.
KalyvasA (2013)
Constituent power. Political Concepts: A Critical Lexicon3(1): 1–13.
32.
KawagishiN (2003) The Constitution of Japan: An Unfinished Revolution. J.S.D. Dissertation, Yale Law School, USA.
33.
KawaguchiA (1999)
Kenpō-gaku to kokutai ron: Kokutai ron-sha Minobe Tatsukichi [Constitutional Law and the Concept of Polity: The Ideas of Minobe Tatsukichi]. Shigaku Zasshi [Journal of Historical Science]
108: 64–84.
34.
KawamuraS (2014)
The National Polity and the formation of the modern national subject in Japan.Japan Forum26(1): 25–45.
35.
KokubunNoriko (1993)
Minobe Tatsukichi no Kokka Hōjin Setsu: Sono Nipponteki Tokureisei [Minobe Tatsukichi’s Theory of Juristische Staatsperson: Regarding its Japaneseness]. Keiōgijukudaigaku Hōgakukenkyūkai [Journal of Law and Political Studies]
66(10): 29–57.
36.
KrabbeH (1922) The Modern Idea of the State.
Westport, CT:
Hyperion Press.
37.
KyōgokuO (1988) Kindai Nihongo No Kenkyu [The Study of Modern Japanese].
Tokyo:
Touensha.
38.
LargeSS (1992) Emperor Hirohito and Shōwa Japan: A Political Biography.
London:
Routledge.
39.
LoughlinM (2014)
The concept of constituent power.European Journal of Political Theory13(2): 218–237.
40.
MasatsuguI (1960) Meiji Kenpō Seiritsushi [The History of the Creation of the Meiji Constitution], Vol. 1.
Tokyo:
Yūhikaku.
41.
MichelmanFI (1997)
How can the people ever make the law?The Modern Schoolman74(4): 311–330.
42.
MichelmanFI (1998) Constitutional authorship. In: AlexanderL (ed.) Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations.
New York:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 64–98.
43.
MillerF (1965) Minobe Tatsukichi.
Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
44.
MinearRH (1970) Japanese Tradition and Western Law.
Cambridge, MA:
Harvard University.
45.
MinobeT (1923a) Kenpō Satsuyō [Compendium of the Constitution] 1.
Tokyo:
Futabadō. Kindle edition.
46.
MinobeT (1923b) Kenpō Satsuyō [Compendium of the Constitution] 2.
Tokyo:
Futabadō. Kindle edition.
47.
MinobeT (1923c) Kenpō Satsuyō [Compendium of the Constitution] 3.
Tokyo:
Futabadō. Kindle edition.
48.
MinobeT (ed.) (1929) Fusenjōyaku Chū “Jinmin No Na Ni Oite” No Mondai [The Problem of the Name Jin-min in the Kellogg-Briand Pact].
Tokyo:
Nippon Hyōronsha.
49.
MinobeT (1935a) Nihon Kenpō no Kihonshugi [The Fundamental Principles of the Japanese Constitution] 1.
Tokyo:
Nihon Hyōronsha. Kindle edition.
50.
MinobeT (1935b) Nihon Kenpō no Kihonshugi [The Fundamental Principles of the Japanese Constitution] 2.
Tokyo:
Nihon Hyōronsha. Kindle edition.
51.
MinobeT (1935c) Isshinjō no benmei [A Personal Excuse]. Speech delivered at Kizokuin Honkaigi, Tokyo, 25 February. Kindle edition.
52.
MiyazawaT (1970) Tennō Kikan Setsu Jiken:Shiryō wa Kataru [The Emperor Organ Incident: Historical Records Speak].
Tokyo:
Yuhikaku.
NegriA (1999) Insurgencies.
Minneapolis, MN:
University of Minnesota Press.
55.
NishimuraY (2010)
‘Daihyō’. ‘kokueki’. ‘yoron’: Minobe Tatsukichi no Kizoku-in Ron [‘Representation,’ ‘National Interest,’ ‘Public Opinion’: Minobe Tatsukichi’s Theory of the House of Peers].Hokudai Hōgaku Ronshū [The Hokkaido Law Review]
61: 193–248.
56.
OlsonK (2007)
Paradoxes of constitutional democracy.American Journal of Political Science51(2): 330–343.
57.
OlsonK (2016) Imagined Sovereignties: The Power of the People and Other Myths of the Modern Age.
New York:
Cambridge University Press.
58.
OzekiM (2014) Nihon Kindai Shuken to Rikken Seitai Kōsō [The Modern Sovereignty of Japan and Constitutionalism].
Tokyo:
Nihonhyōronsha.
59.
PitkinH (1967) The Concept of Representation.
Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
60.
RubinelliL (2019)
How to think beyond sovereignty: On Sieyes and constituent power.European Journal of Political Theory18(1): 47–67.
61.
SieyèsE (2003) Political Writings. Translated by M Sonenscher. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
62.
SkyaWA (2009) Japan's Holy War: The Ideology of Radical Shinto Ultranationalism.
Durham, NC:
Duke University.
63.
SoraiM (1998)
Minobe Tatsukichi to Gikai no Seitō-sei Kiki.Hōgaku62: 45–86.
64.
TakiiK (2010) Itō Hirobumi: Chi no seijika [Itō Hirobumi, Japan’s First Prime Minister and Father of the Meiji Constitution].
Tokyo:
Chūōkōron Shinsha.
65.
TekinS (2016) Founding Acts: Constitutional Origins in a Democratic Age.
Philadelphia, PA:
University of Pennsylvania Press.
66.
UrbinatiNWarrenM (2008)
The concept of representation in contemporary democratic theory.Annual Review of Political Science11: 387–412.
