On 11 June 2025 the National Diet (or parliament) of Japan enacted a bill that will turn the Science Council of Japan, a body of scientists and scholars that advises the government, into a corporate entity. Many academics in Japan have opposed this change, as it will restrict academic freedom, especially the freedom to criticize the government’s promotion of arms technology and research on weapons in universities. Many intellectuals and citizens protested on the street outside the National Diet Building in Tokyo, in several street protests during the last month, including the 4th of June. (Video of the protest on the 4 is available in Japanese here).
Photo from Ono Masami of street protest against Gakujutsu Kaigi revision
This issue was discussed last month in a monthly community radio program called “Teni Teo Radio” in Gifu City, Japan. They have a segment entitled “Discover Kindness! Exploring the Constitution!” (Yasashisa hakken! Kempō tanken!). Each episode lasts 10 minutes. In the segment translated below, constitutional law scholar KONDŌ Makoto is interviewed by the host about various issues related to the liberal constitution of Japan in an easy-to-understand way. This interview was recorded on 25 May 2025, and is being broadcast several times this month. It revolved around the revision of “Science Council of Japan Act” currently under consideration in the Diet. The host TAKADA Yoko is Professor Kondō’s colleague from the community radio program.
Translation of Interview Segment
Professor KONDŌ Makoto: Today I would like to talk about the proposed amendment to the Science Council of Japan (SCJ) Act. On 1 October 2020, five years ago, the administration of former Prime Minister SUGA Yoshihide rejected six nominees of the Science Council of Japan without providing any reasons for this decision. And in a recent court ruling regarding this matter, the Tokyo District Court ordered the government to disclose, by 16 May 2025, the reasons for refusing to appoint them. Former Prime Minister KISHIDA Fumio, who came to power a year after the incident, did not withdraw the refusal to appoint them. On the contrary, his administration announced a draft amendment to the Science Council of Japan (SCJ) Act, stating that members would be appointed in accordance with the opinion of the prime minister. This sparked severe criticism from both domestic and international academic circles, who argued that it would undermine the independence of the SCJ. This led to the withdrawal of the bill.
Despite suffering a major defeat in the general election and becoming a minority government, the ISHIBA Shigeru administration submitted to the National Diet on 7 March of this year a bill revising the law concerning the Science Council of Japan. The bill states that committee members will not be directly appointed by the prime minister but instead will be selected by supervisors or advisory committee members appointed by the prime minister, thereby ensuring independence. On 13 May, with the support of the Nippon Ishin no Kai (i.e., “Japan Innovation Party”), the bill was rammed through the Lower House, and is currently under review in the Upper House. Critics have called this amendment just a superficial fix, and a former president of the SCJ, as well as numerous domestic academic societies and organizations such as the Japan Federation of Bar Associations (JFBA), have issued strong joint statements opposing the bill.
Q: What changes to the Act have been proposed?
A: Until now, the SCJ has been an independent national agency of scientists with the authority to issue recommendations as a “council of advisors to the government” comprising 870,000 scientists from all fields of research in Japan. This bill would transform it into a private subcontracting agency that receives funding from the government to formulate policies for the ruling power, similar to Nomura Research Institute. In other words, it would be converted into a “Special Corporation think tank.” It would no longer be worthy of the name “Science Council.”
Q: How did the SCJ (Science Council of Japan) originally come into being?
A: The first national academy of modern Japan was established as the Tokyo Academy of Sciences in 1879 (in the early Meiji period), ten years before the Meiji Constitution was enacted (in 1890). It was later renamed the Imperial Academy. From the outset, the selection of members was not subject to external interference. The 1920 Academic Research Council evolved from the Imperial Academy, and was the precursor to the postwar SCJ. It was a national academy centered on the natural sciences. The Hara Cabinet (i.e., of HARA Takashi [1856-1921]) established it in response to an invitation from the Royal Society of London. It followed Western principles and, in terms of both membership selection and decision-making, it was an independent body.
Q: What happened after that?
A: Unfortunately, in the midst of the Second Sino-Japanese War, the State General Mobilization Law was enacted in 1938, requiring the mobilization of science for the military. And in 1939, the government proposed a plan to establish a science research fund of 3 million yen at the time (which is equivalent to 30 billion yen today) and grant the Academic Research Council the authority to allocate funds for military purposes, thereby advancing the Imperial Government’s plan to intervene in personnel matters. The 1940 General Assembly initially rejected the government’s proposal, but under further pressure, after the entire executive board of the Academic Research Council resigned in protest, the Council was militarized in 1941, the year the Pacific War began. By 1943, both the president and all members were being appointed by the government, and it had actually become an organization that was geared toward total war, including in the humanities. Many scholars who resisted faced oppression and imprisonment under the Peace Preservation Law of 1925.
Q: When we look at the history of how governments have distorted the nature of academia in order to advance imperialism, the phrase “history repeats itself, with a twist” comes to mind.
A: That’s right. Once again, the ruling party is demanding the militarization of the Science Council of Japan (SCJ). Academic freedom is often referred to as a barometer of democracy. It is the “canary in the coal mine” of war. The Swedish “Institute for Diversity and Democracy” publishes an “Academic Freedom Index” of 180 countries worldwide, and they sounded the alarm, stating that in recent years the global trend has been toward a decline in academic freedom. The study also explains that Japan ranks at the bottom 30% among advanced nations in terms of academic freedom. (See 2023 report here). And the reason given is that our universities and other academic institutions have low scores in terms of organizational autonomy. Although the Constitution of Japan guarantees “academic freedom,” the corporatization of national universities has stripped them of their autonomy, and university faculty have succumbed to fiscal policy directives from the government, resulting in the loss of academic freedom. This is the backdrop to the recent amendment of the SCJ Act.
Q: What are the problems with the current reforms being proposed?
A: The SCJ is a national institution established by the Science Council of Japan Act of 1948.
Like the Audit Bureau of Japan (ABJ), the SCJ is a body that is independent from the government and has the authority to make recommendations to the government. It has been referred to as the “Congress of Scholars” or the “representative body of scientists both domestically and internationally.” The current revision proposal aims to remove the SCJ from the category of national institutions and transform it into a special corporation without any voice. The government is trying to transform it into a mere think tank, a private advisory body composed solely of individuals appointed by the government.
Q: Until now, the SCJ has been an independent organization, separate from the government, and also an organization that represents Japanese scientists and scholars internationally and makes recommendations to the government. However, with this revision of the law, it will become a mere advisory body to the government. Is something like this really possible?
A: The SCJ is an organization affiliated with UNESCO, a United Nations agency, and for a national academy to join the International Academy of Science, which is the global body of science academies, it must be a “national academy” in its particular country. To qualify, it must meet the five global standards: First, it must be a representative body. Second, it must be a public institution. Third, it must have a stable national funding and national budget. Fourth, it must be an independent institution. Fifth, it must have independent personnel selection, meaning that members are elected by and among the members themselves.
The proposed amendments, however, would cause the SCJ to fail to meet any of these criteria, and furthermore, the Auditor and Evaluation Committee would be appointed by the prime minister, the Personnel Selection Advisory Committee and the Operational Advisory Committee for Determining Activity Policies would be composed of external members, and the proposed amendments, if enacted, could completely strip the SCJ of its independence in terms of its personnel and the activities in which it engages.
Q: Is it true that the government does not care about the fact that Japan’s national academy (i.e., the SCJ) would fail to meet any of the global standards set by the other national academies and would lose its status in the world, with this amendment?
A: Recently, a clearance system has been legislated based on the State Secrets Law (of December 2013) and the Economic Security Clearance Act of 2024. This system limits access to classified information to those who meet certain criteria. Under this clearance system, one can see that, just as in the Pre-war Era, scholars who are critical of government policies will be expelled. It is as clear as day. This is a path we have walked before. It is the path taken by the Academic Research Council under the Peace Preservation Law (of 1925) in the pre-war era.
The post Q and A with Kondō Makoto about the Revision of the Science Council of Japan first appeared on Dissident Voice.
This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Kondo Makoto, Takada Yoko, and Joseph Essertier.