The real problem is the intent that rejects the emperor’s will to abdicate before death

The Emperor’s statement on August 8th was a message seeking the institutionalization of abdication, referring to his concern about the possible stagnation of Japanese society once he falls ill from old age; reminiscent of the excessive “voluntary restraint” experienced during September 1988 to January 1989, when Emperor Hirohito (Showa) fell into a critical condition. It has been nearly 70 years since the institutionalization of the “emperor as the symbol of the state.” As the first “emperor as the symbol of the state,” Emperor Akihito (Heisei) presumably indicated his acknowledgment that what a “symbolic emperor” should be and how an emperor should stand in the modern world had not yet been established, through the multiple references to the term in his statement. In other words, it can be considered that this message came out of his concern that, without entrenching a more current form of emperorship and supporting succession system, the continuity of the imperial family system itself could be compromised.

The current Imperial House Law does not allow for the retirement of an emperor (abdication before death), but this is grossly unnatural, if not inhuman. And if you look at this statement as a message from the emperor as one human being, I feel that it is a manifestation of an unsurprisingly natural feeling. In the public opinion poll, more than 80% of those polled are for the institutionalization of abdication. This is to be expected from an ordinary citizen’s perspective.

On the other hand, there seem to be some opinions that find this statement questionable, opining that the Emperor has implicated the amendment of the Imperial House Law, and has hence made a political statement, which an emperor is barred from making. I say this is unreasonable. The issue of an emperor’s abdication is, in reality, not a case that can be or should be initiated from within the environs. The Emperor’s statement is possibly based on such understanding and is an act arising out of the hope to establish a modern method of Imperial succession during his reign as the first emperor as the symbol of the state. In fact, Emperor Akihito has been communicating his intention to abdicate to his close relations for some time. The Imperial Household Agency has also been reviewing the possibility of an institutional amendment. Nevertheless, there are people who have raised questions over the Emperor’s speech and are claiming that it is a barred political statement. The true intent of these nay-sayers is to uphold the Meiji reign as the standard of emperorship and establish a being like Emperor Meiji, who was the source of national authority. When mentioning the constitutional status of the emperor as “the symbol of the state and of the unity of the people,” their focus is more on “unity” rather than on “symbol.” From their perspective, which idealizes the Meiji era, the current emperor’s statement to befit the modern age becomes a “problem.”

Looking back, the emperorship should have been fundamentally changed in accordance with the times after the war defeat during the Showa period. This includes not only the issue of abdication, but also the male-line succession law (allowing only male descendants of an emperor to succeed to the throne). This provision of the Imperial Family Law runs counter to the post-war gender equality principle and could even compromise Imperial succession. While rarely mentioned, what has made male-line succession possible was the de facto concubinage system. For example, both Emperor Mutsuhito (Meiji) and Emperor Yoshihito (Taisho) were not the offspring of the empress, the emperor’s lawful wife. The Imperial Family has accepted illegitimate children along with legitimate children as successors to the throne, which has helped maintain the male-line system. Furthermore, the five regent families and other noblemen also supported the emperor’s concubinage. The male-line system was only sustainable due to the institutionalization of court ladies as concubines. Can, in today’s world, the Emperor have concubines? It is unlikely that his people will support concubinage. So, in the end, this issue has the same root as abdication. After the Second World War, Emperor Showa issued the Humanity Declaration and became “the symbol of the State and of the unity of the people.” The environment surrounding the Imperial Family, not to mention Japanese society, has also drastically changed. Nevertheless, the structure of the Imperial succession has remained the same and has not been adapted to the current climate, which has led to all of these issues now coming to a head.

Looking across the world, there are countries with queens that occupy the throne, not to mention broader succession schemes. Even in Japan, there have been empresses, not only in ancient times, but also in the Edo period. The male-line succession rule was only reinforced during the Meiji period. Back then, the Emperor had supreme command and took on a militaristic role. In place of Emperor Yoshihito (Taisho), who was too ill to ride a horse and had to review the troops from a carriage, Prince Hirohito (later Emperor Showa) served as regent and reviewed the troops on a white horse. This is a well-known anecdote; the appearance of the royal successor raised troop morale and heightened Imperial popularity among the people. Perhaps a male emperor was suitable for this age. But is it for the present day?