Question from a reader:
I am concerned about the recent elections. Isn’t it illegal for corporate votes to go to the Liberal Democratic Party, Komeito, and the Constitutional Democratic Party? I believe that large corporations are favored, and in return, they gather donations and votes, which poses a problem from a democratic perspective. In particular, regarding corporate votes, isn’t it often
the case that employees are half-forced to vote for certain candidates or parties at the direction of their superiors? Additionally, corporate donations create a system where financially powerful companies can donate to specific parties, leading to an increasing influence of large corporations in politics. If this continues, I worry that the influence of large corporations will grow, resulting in a dictatorial situation where politics is dominated by certain large parties. I think we might continue to see a political landscape that offers only disadvantages to the public, but how do you all feel about this?

Corporate Votes and Political Donations: A Crisis for Democracy?

Recently, the issue of corporate votes and corporate donations in elections has garnered attention. In particular, many people may wonder how corporate votes for major parties like the Liberal Democratic Party, Komeito, and the Constitutional Democratic Party are influencing the political landscape. I often find myself seriously contemplating this issue. Are corporate votes truly illegal? And does corporate involvement in politics really benefit the public? This time, I would like to delve into this issue from a legal perspective.

Corporate Votes and Their Legal Aspects

First, let’s consider corporate votes. In Japan’s electoral system, the voting rights held by individuals are clear, but corporations are not permitted to cast votes. However, corporate involvement in politics typically occurs through donations. Corporate donations can be made to specific parties or candidates under the Political Funds Control Act. These donations are often used as a means for corporations to gain profits, as corporations may wish to influence policy decisions. For example, if a large corporation donates to a specific party, it can encourage that party to promote policies favorable to its interests. Additionally, corporations may engage in lobbying politicians to protect their interests. While this is legally permitted, does it truly have a positive impact on democracy?

The Impact of Donations on Elections

Let’s consider actual examples of how corporate donations can influence elections. For instance, suppose a specific large corporation makes substantial donations to the Liberal Democratic Party in a particular election. As a result, policies favorable to that corporation are implemented, allowing it to gain further profits. If this pattern continues, that corporation may increase its influence over politics, ultimately distorting democracy itself. Through my part-time work at a judicial scrivener’s office, I have had many opportunities to think about the connection between politics and economics. While providing legal advice at the request of clients, I have witnessed how corporations utilize the law to protect their interests. This sometimes leads to exploiting legal gray areas or seeking loopholes. Such situations can appear very opaque to the general public, raising questions and concerns.

The Reality of Half-Forced Voting

Another concern regarding corporate votes is the issue of half-forced voting. There are opinions suggesting that superiors may instruct employees to “vote for this candidate.” Such situations often reflect the power structures within corporations. If an employee does not comply with their superior’s wishes, their position in the workplace may become precarious. In fact, during my university days, I experienced being instructed by a superior to “participate in this event,” and I felt compelled to comply. Of course, the impact of this may be smaller compared to the political world, but it cannot be denied that similar structures exist within corporations.

Concerns About a Dictatorial Situation

I have concerns that if this continues, we may face a dictatorial situation where large corporations dominate politics. As corporate influence grows, politics may be controlled by specific large parties, leading to the voices of the public being unheard. Particularly, the opinions of younger generations may become less reflected, narrowing their choices for the future, which is extremely dangerous. As I study psychology, I often consider group psychology and the influence of power. People tend to follow those in power, and it goes without saying that they are particularly susceptible to corporate influence. If such structures persist, democracy may cease to function, ultimately increasing the disadvantages for the public.

Solutions and Hope for the Future

So, how should we address this issue? First, it is necessary to enhance the transparency of political donations and reduce corporate influence through legislation. For example, setting limits on corporate donations and making donation information public would allow the general public to monitor that influence. Additionally, it is important for each citizen to maintain an interest in politics. By participating in elections, individuals can express their opinions and influence national politics. Many young people have already raised their voices through demonstrations and social media, and I hope that this movement continues to expand. Ultimately, for democracy to function healthily, we citizens need to keep a close watch and actively engage in politics. Simply lamenting corporate influence will not bring about change. If each of us seeks change and takes action, we can create a better political future.

Conclusion

The issues of corporate votes and corporate donations are legally and socially very complex. However, by directing our attention to these issues and raising our voices, we can gradually promote change. For the sake of democracy and the future, isn’t it time to take action? Let’s focus on politics and express our opinions to choose our future.