Overshadowed by the Aug. 30 Lower House election was the national electoral review of Supreme Court justices held the same day. The review deserves a higher profile. The top court should give information about the justices and their opinions in court rulings more frequently and in a manner easily accessible to voters.
The review system is based on a provision in Article 79 of the Constitution, which states that the appointment of Supreme Court justices shall be reviewed by the people at the first Lower House election after their appointment, at the first such election after a lapse of 10 years, and in the same manner each 10 years thereafter.
The ballot sheet lists the names of Supreme Court justices whose appointments are being reviewed. Voters who want to dismiss them must mark "X" before their names. A blank space means that voters endorse the appointment — similar to the balloting system used in elections in the Soviet Union. Some people say the approval method is too passive; they suggest changing the system to require voters who approve of justice appointments to mark "O" before their names.
With your current subscription plan you can comment on stories. However, before writing your first comment, please create a display name in the Profile section of your subscriber account page.