↑ナイアガラ・オン・ザ・レイクのQueen streetのジェラニウム

AbEndでも話題の美人秘書、村野瀬玲奈さんが今から一ヶ月前くらいに

共同声明　『私たちは現日本政府の体制変革（レジームチェンジ）に反対します』

をブログで紹介して下さった。

憲法を変えるという政府の本当の目的は何か、

又、憲法改正に反対する理由は何か、

憲法改正を阻止するために私達は何をするべきなのかなどを

声明文にされているので、ぜひ、読んでいただきたい。

自民党安倍政権が憲法改正を参院選の争点にすると

息巻いていた頃のことだと思うけど、

あの頃の勢いはどこに行ってしまったのか、

連立政権の公明党に反対されたせいもあって

最近では、安倍が憲法改正を語ることはないし、

ほとんどニュースの話題にのぼらなくなっ� ��しまった。

まるで自民党は、憲法改正を参院選の争点にするのを

やめてしまったかのように見える。

憲法を変えるといっても、

結局、憲法のどこをどう変えるのかということも

国民は知らされずにいるため、

賛成も反対もできない人がほとんどだ。

そんな折、セクシー美人秘書の玲奈さんは、

憲法改正に反対する国民の意志を世界中に表明するために

この共同声明文をフランス語や中国語、英語に訳してくださった。

「現日本政府の体制変革（レジーム・チェンジ）に反対する共同声明文」の英語版

ただし、中国語訳は、『私たちは現日本政府の体制変革

（レジームチェンジ）に反対します』の共同執筆者である

ごんさんのお知り合いの方によるものだそうだ。

こう して、憲法改正に反対する国民の意志を

世界中に表明することによって、

憲法改正を阻止することができるかもしれないのだ。

まずは、ほとんどの国民が憲法改悪の恐ろしさに気づいていないので、

その重大さを知らせることから始め、

それから、憲法改悪に反対する日本国民の意志を

世界中に伝えることが大切だと思う。

ただ、憲法問題は国民投票法も含め、複雑なので、

なかなか簡潔に説明した文献が見当たらない。

そこで、この文章を少し短くして、簡単に要旨がわかるように、

美爾依版（ミニ・バージョン）を作ってみた。

それでももっとこうした方がいいという意見があったら、

ぜひぜひ、知らせて欲しい。

『憲法改定反対』理由：

１．「国民主権」・「平和主義」・「基本的人権の尊重」という三大原則をかかげる日本国憲法の根幹に反民主主義的な改変を加えるものである。

２．現憲法の改定に関して定められた条文「第九十六条」の改定が行われれば、日本国憲法は硬性憲法の性格を実質的に失い、主権者である国民の意思と無関係に、政権側の都合でいつでもどのようにでも憲法を、その根幹すら変えることができるようになる。

つまり、現政府与党のもくろむ改憲とは、「主権者である国民が国家に命令する」立憲主義を否定し、「国家が一方的に国民に命令する」ことを可能にするための全面的改憲である。

『憲法改定手続法案（国民投票法案）』反対理由：

1.　本国民投票� �案には最低投票率の規定が設けられておらず、有権者の二割程度の賛成票だけでも条文の改定が可能である。（憲法の基本原則、民主的・立憲的根幹が簡単に変更されてしまう内容である。）

2.　国民投票において、投票運動での自由な言論活動に罰則とともに設けられている制限があり、罰則の適用が恣意的になされる危険性を排除できない。（その罰則・制限が、現憲法を擁護する立場の者にとってのみ不利にはたらくと考えられる。）

3.　国民が改憲案についての賛否を判断するための広報の公平性が保証されないこと。（国民投票広報協議会に参加できる人員、及び公費で賄われる広報が国会の議席数に応じて割り振られるため、多数の議席を占める政党が一方的に有利になる。また、制限なしの有料広告は財力のある側 だけに一方的に有利になる。）

4.　憲法改定についての国会の発議から国民投票までの期間が短い。（国民が的確に意思決定できる可能性が低い。）

5.　国民投票における、賛否を問うための投票方式があいまいになっている。（抱き合わせによる恣意的な誘導を避けるため、個別の条文ごとに賛否の意思表示ができる投票方式にするべきだが、その点があいまいである。）

『憲法改正を阻止するために私達がやるべきこと』

現日本政府がめざす体制変革（レジームチェンジ）によって、日本が与党や行政指揮者の意向によって何の留保もなく戦争のできる国にされてしまうことに反対する。

私はイリノイ州の運転免許証で車を購入することができます

日本が非民主主義的あるいは立憲主義を否定する国に変えられてしまうことをなんとしても食い止める。

日本が国民主権、平和主義、基本的人権の尊重という現行憲法の原理を発展させ、具体化させることを求めていく。

日本の平和と民主主義の恩恵を世界中の人々と共有することを望み、それが自由と平和を愛し民主主義の擁護・拡大を望む世界の諸国民の願いでもあると信じる。

日本の政府与党である自民党が、「体制変革（レジームチェンジ）」の意思を公言して憲法改定手続法をスタートさせようとしている今、残された時間は多くない。

この意思が歴史の審判に耐えうるものであることを祈念しながら、こ� ��メッセージを世界中に送りたい。そしてこのアクションが、国際社会全体を次のステージへと導く「平和への道」を切り開くことを願っている。心ある世界市民が、私たちの日本と、そして全世界の平和と民主主義を勝ちえるためのこのプロジェクトに、それぞれの国で、その地域社会で、その生活の場で連帯してくださることを心からお願いしたい。

２００７年５月３日

英語版は日本語のミニ・バージョンに合わせて、

短くした文のみ添削済み。

変更した部分はほとんどが"the" や"a"の格助詞だった。

難しい単語や表現を使いこなし、玲奈さんは、フランス語だけではなく、

かなり高度な英語力や政治の知識も兼ね備えた方だというのがうかがえる。

その上、美人ということなので、リアルではかなりもてるはずだと思う（笑）。

"We oppose the total revision of the Japanese constitution in progress by the current Japanese government."

The Japanese government and the parties in power are revising the Japanese constitution, under the slogan: "release Japan from its political regime of the post-war period". In fact, their intention is to remove the constitutional constraints imposed upon the political and administrative power of the State. Indeed, their plan of this "regime change" is hidden in the draft of the "new constitution" published by the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) on October 28, 2005.

The reasons why we are against the regime change are as follows:

First, it reserves the fundamental human rights and civil freedom on the pretext of the priority to "the public interest", a reduction or a substantial suspension of the pacifist principle and a relaxing or a substantial abrogation of the principle of the separation of the religion and the politics. This means an anti-democratic change of the fundamental lines of the Japanese constitution which has its three principles: "popular sovereignty", "pacifism" and "the respect of the fundamental human rights".

Second, article 96 of the current Japanese constitution stipulates the reform of the current constitution which is rigid will be modified too, so that the government can revise the constitution by own initiative and a parliamentary vote, without any procedure of validation by the Japanese people, in a right and equitable way. With such a change of this article, the Japanese constitution will lose its rigid character substantially and the government will have the power to change this constitution, even its fundamental lines, any time and in any way, to suit the government's own convenience, regardless of the intentions of the the Japanese people.

These two points make us believe that this constitutional revision under the slogan: "release Japan from its political regime of the post-war period", will not be limited only to a partial modification of some articles but that it will be also a full-scale revision of all the constitution. In other words, we think that this constitutional revision is an announcement of an antidemocratic change in Japan. If such a constitutional revision as the government and the parties currently in power imagine they carriy this out, The constitution of Japan will be something completely different, with its democratic principles and its constitutional characteristic weakened.

（↓日本文でカットした部分｝

起こりうるインターネット犯罪

Indeed, from a democratic point of view, the political behavior of the LDP which constitutes a majority in Parliament and government, currently shows many dangerous concrete signs. In particular, since the 1990's, the LDP is gradually following nationalist policies, which consist in giving priority to military affairs, while mobilizing the power of the State more easily and restricting fundamental human rights. The executives of the government and the parties currently in power, in particular the LDP, hoist their slogan: "release Japan from its political regime of the post-war period", while neglecting the fundamental law which is the current constitution of Japan, following the draft of October 28th, 2005, of its "new constitution" and acting as if there were not their obligation for the regent, the ministers of State, the members of the Diet, the judges and all the other civil servants to respect and defend the current constitution, which is stipulated in the article 99. These deputies of the LDP reproach the current constitution, in an abstract and unilateral way, pretending that it does not correspond to the times. They claim unceasingly and obstinately, that human rights support selfishness and give bad influences to public order and moral standards. They interpret the constitution forcibly in their favor. Moreover, many policies which are already applied or which are prepared or planned transgress the principles of the constitution, to the extent that we dare to consider them anti-constitutional. We observe all that, day after day and we have sufficiently realistic doubts.

From these facts, we can conclude that the Japanese government and the parties currently in power aim at a full-scale constitutional revision, in order to allow them to deny its constitutional character which should consist in giving orders to the State on behalf of the Japanese people and on the other hand, in order to allow them to give orders unilaterally to the people on behalf of the State.

Obviously, only one constitutional revision will not complete a "regime change" sacrificing democracy and constitutionalism. In the same way, the Japanese who aspire for peace and freedom, and Japanese society that they constitute will perhaps not change immediately their behavior and direction towards dangerous totalitarianism. However, with the intentions of this total constitutional revision by the LDP, it will be inevitable that the framework of the legal system to prevent Japan from moving towards the antidemocratic and anti-constitutional direction would not be valid anymore. Moreover, it is undeniable that such a regime change will shift the conscience and the political behavior of the population to an antidemocratic direction in the medium and long term, Japan has experienced totalitarianism and militarism during the Second World War. In the current situation, an undeniable part of Japanese journalism supports this attempt of the LDP to revise the constitution, consciously serving the directing and arbitrary statements of the government. And as mentioned before, we cannot qualify this attempt as democratic nor constitutional. If such a regime change is accomplished in this situation, it will be a deeply serious error for Japan and the international community in the future. We can easily imagine it, if we have a look on the irresponsible attitude of the Japanese political parties in power and on their lack of a humanitarian point of view about the sexual slaves of the Japanese imperial army during the Second World War which created a worldwide sensation recently.

Another more important and worrying thing is the current relations between the USA and Japan. Actually, since the cold war between the east and the west which lasted one half-century, and now that the wave of globalization reigns in the whole world, many agreements were established by the requests from the United States, in order to support and supplement the military strategy of the United States. There are, for example, the conclusion of the "Treaty of mutual cooperation and security between Japan and the United States of America" (1960), "the Guidelines for U.S.-Japan Defense Co-operation" (1997), the Armitage report (the official name: "INSS Special Report", 2000), "The U.S.-Japan Regulatory Reform and Competition Policy Initiative", an enormous expenditure paid by Japan for restructuring of the American military forces remaining in Japan, and the attempts of modification of the interpretation of the Japanese constitution by the Japanese government to widen the extent of the right of collective self-defense, and so on. As time passed, all these agreements substantially destroyed the respect for the articles of the Japanese constitution which should be superior law to these rules. Moreover, the sovereignty which should belong to the people is also transmitted gradually to the State. Indeed, the current full-scale revision of the constitution by the Japanese government is about to finalize its ultimate objective in an unconcealed way.

Thus, the Japanese people now are faced with a danger to submit to the interest of the government and that of the current parties in power which form an integral unity in the ally, the United States, politically and diplomatically. That means at the same time that Japan will lose its own sovereignty and that it will become a substantial possession of the United States in their military strategy. Thus, the current Japanese Self-Defence Forces will be obligatorily brought unilaterally to follow the military strategy of the United States, like a dependent troop.

誰が保全とどのように停止することができますか？

It is regrettable that this full-scale constitutional revision or "this establishment of a new constitution" is in progress, whereas a majority of the Japanese people do not understand its purposes well. The reason for that is that the majority of the Japanese people would be opposed to this constitutional revision if they really understood the intention of the Japanese government and that of the parties currently in power. Indeed, we do not want a Japanese military force to be deployed abroad to serve the United States' military strategy acting always in an unilateralist way. We do not want Japanese people's blood and that of the people of the world to run in wars, either.

Let us take a look at the history of Japan. The purpose of the LDP, that has his root in dominating political groups in power before and during the Second World War and that was almost all the time in power also after this war, is to establish its "new voluntary constitution" denying the current democratic constitution which was written just after the defeat of Japan in the Second World War. And now, Shinzo Abe, grandson of Nobusuke Kishi who was one of the political personalities with the highest responsibility for the Japanese colonialist invasion into the other Asian countries under the pretext of creation of a "Greater East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere" and for the policies applied during the occupation of Japan by the United States after the war, is about to execute the idea of his grandfather, carrying out his dangerous intrigues. Shinzo Abe, just after his installation as the Prime Minister in September 2006, announced his slogan: "release Japan from its political regime of the post-war period", which was not explicitly shown as an electoral promise of the LDP on the preceding legislative elections of the House of Representatives in August 2005. On that occasion, Abe announced clearly that he would quickly carry out his idea concretely with constitutional reform. And the LDP, to which he belongs and which has an absolute majority of the seats, strongly push this action. We are sure to say that it is a violent negation of the fundamental values of our country in a democracy, which normally should have its principle of popular sovereignty and its constitutional principle.

Now, Japan is one of the biggest economic powers of the world and it has an important influence on the international community. Thus, if Japan reduces or denies its own democracy explicitly and intentionally, it will be a great threat for the peace of the world. We must not let a fascistic tyranny which had led the world to a tragedy in 1930's reproduce in Japan in the 21st century. This is our will, because we reflect deeply on the dreadful damage caused by the erroneous war in the past, because we are doubtful of the nationalist policies put into force by the current Japanese government and of their non-democratic characters and because we fear that Japan represents a threat and a nationalist despotism in the future. Once again, this is our will from each one of us, because we believe in the true democracy.

（↑日本文でカットした部分）

"We oppose the "bill on the procedures of constitutional reform (the law on the referendum)" that the Japanese government and the parties currently in power aim at adopting, for the following reasons: "

From the very beginning, the purpose of the constitution should be to guarantee the right to control. The power of the State to the people. Precisely, the procedures of constitutional reform should be right, equitable, clear, transparent, conform to the fundamental principles of the democracy which are popular with the people, and respect for the fundamental human rights. Firstly, for this objective, it is necessary for the referendum in the procedures of constitutional reform, reflect public opinion as exactly as possible. Secondly, it is necessary for the people to have a free access to as varied political opinions as possible, for an apt decision on behalf of the people. Thirdly, it is necessary for free and equitable popular movements for the referendum to be assured, so that wide and thorough popular discussions might be possible. From this point of view, the bill currently proposed by the government and the parties currently in power does not seem to satisfy the conditions of a right, equitable, clear and transparent referendum, mentioned previously. The reasons are as follows:

1. The bill on the referendum (bill on the procedures of constitutional reform) does not stipulate the minimum rate of participation so that the referendum is valid. For example, only voices of 20% of the voters will be able to approve a reform of articles. (Thus, the constitutional and democratic principles of the constitution could be easily modified.)

2. In this bill on the referendum, limitations with some sanctions might be an obstacle to the freedom of opinion and sanctions are likely to be applied arbitrarily by the government. (These sanctions and these limitations could be disadvantageous only to people defending the constitution in force.)

3. Equity for the people to make a deliberate judgment on proposed projects of constitutional reforms is not assured in terms of public relations. (As the number of participants in the council for public relations for the referendum and publicities paid by the public money will be allotted almost purely proportionally to the number of the seats at the Parliament, the political parties which have more seats will have unilaterally disproportionate advantages. Moreover, unbounded paying publicities will favor unilaterally fortunate parties.)

4. The period from the proposal of the project of constitutional reform at the Parliament until the referendum is too short. (It is not sure that the people can make an informed judgment.)

5. The mode of the poll on the referendum is ambiguous. (An arbitrary leading by grouping of articles on the vote should be avoided and each voter should make judgments article by article. But these points are not clearly defined in the bill suggested by the government and the parties currently in power.)

"We oppose any antidemocratic regime change by the current Japanese government and we ask for a development and a concretization of the democratic principles of the Japanese constitution in force."

We oppose any regime change which the current Japanese government is aiming at and which will permit Japan to make war without reserve by the intention of the political parties in power and that of the leaders of the government.

We want to prevent Japan by all means from transforming itself back into an antidemocratic or anti-constitutional country.

We aspire to the development of democratic principles, which are popular with the Japanese people. Pacifism and respect for fundamental human rights, the concretization of values of the present Japanese constitution.

We want to share the fruits of peace and democracy in Japan, with all peoples of the world.

We believe that this is also the will of the peoples of the world who aspires to freedom and peace, wishing to defend and develop democracy.

The LDP currently in power announced their will of a "regime change" and now that they are about to start constitutional reform (the law on the referendum), there is not much time left to resist it.

We address this message to the whole world, hoping that our will holds well in the face of the judgment of history. We also hope that our actions will open a way which will bring all the international community to the next stage towards peace. We sincerely ask all the people of the world of good will to unite in front of our project, in their respective countries, their respective communities and their respective places of everyday life, to win peace and democracy for our country and of course, those of the world together.

May 3rd, 2007

関連記事：

安倍晋三総理、人相悪化の一途（編集委員時評）（JANJAN　５月２１日)

追記：玲奈さんから、下記のコメントをいただいた。

件名 : ご紹介ありがとうございます

美爾依さん、ていねいな記事でのご紹介ありがとうございます。m(__)m

まず、一つ訂正させてください。中国語版を作ったのは私ではなく、共同声明　『私たちは現日本政府の体制変革（レジームチェンジ）に反対します』の共同執筆者であるごんさんのお知り合いの方です。(^^;;

で、本題です。日本国内で日本人どうしで日本語で議論し情報交換し日本国内で解決することがもちろん必要です。そのためにも、美爾依さんはじめ多くの政治ブロガーが毎日記事を書き発信していますが、言語以前に、日本国内（の自民党内やネトウヨの間など）でしか通じないお粗末な論理や言説に巻き込まれて消耗することも多々あるわけです。「人権メタボ」だの「従軍慰安婦は強制ではなかった」だの「年� �問題の責任は菅直人」だの。

それならば、国際世論の場になんとかこのばかげた日本の民主主義弱体化、立憲主義破壊をすすめる政策の現状を知らせた方がよくはないか、という思いで取り組んでいます。まがりなりにも経済大国である日本が決定的にそんな方向に行ったらいくらなんでもまずいでしょ、と。

チャールズ・オバービー博士のように日本国憲法の第九条を高く評価している海外の人もいますし、各国の新聞の特派員が日本についての記事も書いているわけですが、私たち日本人からも、そういうところからこぼれおちる日本の醜さと私たちの民主主義を求める闘いを海外に向けて発信することはとても有益である、そう信じています。

私の英語力や海外への発信力（いくら美爾依さんに持ち上げていただいた としても...アセアセ）や使える時間は限られているので、美人教師美爾依先生にも指導を入れていただけるのはたいへんにありがたいことです。

また、外国人の知り合いが一人いる方100人がこの共同声明文を流したとしたら、それは、海外から日本に向けた民主化圧力になるとも思いますので、外国人の知り合いに心当たりのある方々はどんどん使ってほしいと思います。

ミニ・バージョンや英語のチェック、ありがとうございます。憧れのイケメン教師・美人教師に採点された答案を返される高校生の気分ってこういう感じかな？爆

URL : http://muranoserena.blog91.fc2.com/

この長文を英語に翻訳するのにどのくらい時間がかかったのだろうか。

玲奈さんの真剣さ、ひたむきさにただ脱帽するばかりである。

この英文は玲奈さんがおっしゃっているように、コピペ歓迎で、

全文でなくても、部分的にコピペ、又は修正して、

北米、英国、オーストラリアなど英語圏にお住まいの方は

最寄のメディア、興味のある友人などに送っていただけたらと思う。

拍手のかわりにランキングの応援よろしくお願いします。

『きっこの日記』や『きっこのブログ』からの訪問者の方々の

おかげもあってランキングが急上昇しました♪

あらためて、ありがとうございます。

政治ランキング１位
総合１２位

社会・経済、動画・フラッシュ、海外生活　１位
総合１２位

BlogPeopleランキング
「ニュース・一般 ／ 政治」部門５位

＊この記事は『安倍晋三 - トラックバック・ピープル』にトラックバックしています。