Session 49: Japanese Legal Education Reform

Organizer: Mayumi Saegusa, University of Illinois, Chicago

Chair: Julian B. Dierkes, University of British Columbia

Discussant: Gerald Paul McAlinn, Keio University

In April 2004, sixty-eight law schools opened for the first time in Japan’s history. These openings reflect a shift in legal education from undergraduate law faculties to graduate-level law schools. Since the Meiji Restoration, the former organizational form has been heavily influenced by the European tradition. The new organizational form is modeled on the United States. This shift represents a massive exogenous shock to institutionalized legal education in Japan. The panel will discuss the origins of this transition and varieties of university responses to this institutional transformation.

Foote will discuss the major forces that have shaped the reforms. Foote has served as a member of government advisory councils and other committees involved in designing the system.

Saegusa will examine divergent patterns of organizational responses to the reform across different levels of universities. She will compare nine universities, looking at how national/private and elite/non-elite dimensions affect response to the reform.

Murai and Fujimoto will present case studies of their universities. Murai’s university is one of the four universities that failed to obtain approval from the Ministry of Education. Murai will describe the obscurity and arbitrariness of the admission process. Fujimoto’s university had to wait a year. Fujimoto will argue that efforts by Shizuoka Uuniversity towards the law school was hampered by its weak position in the community. This process was also impacted by the "agencification" (dokuritsu-gyosei-hojinka) of the national universities enacted in April 2004, the same time as the introduction of law schools.

Forces Shaping Legal Education Reform in Japan

Daniel H. Foote, University of Tokyo

In June 2001, the Justice System Reform Council of Japan recommended fundamental reform of legal education, including calling for the establishment of new graduate-level law schools, heavily influenced by the U.S. model. That recommendation, together with numerous related reforms, became a reality less than three years later; in April 2004, sixty-eight new law schools commenced operations.

The scope and speed of these reforms reflect the confluence of many factors, including deep-rooted concerns over existing legal education, as well as economic and political factors. The design of the new system reflects an even broader range of factors. In addition to the felt need to accommodate elements of the existing system and the impact of self-interest by key players in the debates, distrust among major players helped shape the contours of the new system. Finally, in the implementation stage, the behavior of faculty members, students, and other actors has deeply influenced actual operations; but the not-so-hidden hand of the bar examination casts a wide shadow.

This presentation will explore the major forces that have shaped the reforms and will look back at the first year of operation of the new law schools. The presentation will incorporate personal observations of the author, based on his experiences as a member of government advisory councils and other committees involved in designing the system, as well as his activities at the University of Tokyo School of Law.

The Development of Japanese Law Schools: University Responses to the Law School Reform

Mayumi Saegusa, University of Illinois, Chicago

This presentation will examine divergent patterns of organizational responses to the Japanese legal education reform across different groups of universities. The research intends to evaluate institutional responses to the law school initiative undertaken by eight universities that vary along two dimensions: national/private and elite/non-elite and one new university. The research conducted in-depth interviews with 3-5 law professors in nine selected universities.

There are 92 universities with an undergraduate law faculty and approximately 50,000 law-major undergraduate students in Japan. Among those 92 universities, 71 universities and one brand new university applied for opening a law school in the first year. Consequently, 68 law schools were approved and 4 failed to obtain approval. Nine selected universities all applied but one failed. They all believed that establishing a law school was the only choice for their survival.

Although all of the selected universities chose opening a law school, the expectation for these universities was not the same. For elite universities, whether they are national or private, establishing a law school was expected. On the other hand, non-elite universities made lots of efforts to persuade other departments within the university as well as Ministry of Education to understand the necessity of their law school.

Access to information is another distinctive difference across groups. All of the elite universities—national and private—have faculty members serving as a member of government advisory councils involved in designing the system. On the other hand, non-elite universities are excluded from the decision-making. Thus, non-elite universities have struggled to collect information regarding law school development.

Overreacting to Governmental Guidance: Creation of a Law School in Shizuoka University

Akira Fujimoto, Shizuoka University

This paper describes the process in which Shizuoka University has responded to the legal education reform in Japan. Although the university tried to open a law school in April 2004, as did many other universities, it decided to wait for a year. This is because the university overreacted to governmental guidance. The paper will point out reasons behind the overreacting responses.

Shizuoka University is one of the regional national universities in Japan. Historically, the Ministry of Education has treated nine national universities, including the University of Tokyo and University of Kyoto, differently from the rest of the national universities. These nine universities are regarded as research and researcher-training universities and receive a larger amount of public funding than the other national universities. On the contrary, Shizuoka has a less prestigious status among the national universities. In order not to miss "a law school train," Shizuoka intended to open a law school in 2004. However, Shizuoka was advised by the Ministry of Education to wait a year. Shizuoka could have seen the governmental guidance just as advice but treated it as an order, due to its weak position in the community.

Another element that has influenced Shizuoka’s decision is agencification (dokuritsu-gyosei-hojinka). On April 1, 2004, the national universities became independent legal entities, although they are still grant-maintained governmental bodies. From 2004, the universities are supposed to decide every aspect of their operations on their own, out of the hands of the Ministry of Education. Agencification made Shizuoka more vulnerable to governmental guidance.

Mystery around the Admission Process of Japanese Law Schools

Toshikuni Murai, Ryukoku University

Ryukoku University, a private university located in Kyoto, assented to the law school reform because it might have brought revolutionary changes in Japanese legal education. Ryukoku decided to establish a law school, but it failed to obtain approval. In this presentation, I will discuss three mysteries of the admission process based on my experience at Ryukoku University. The first mystery is about the law school project. Why law schools? Why now? Why such a policy shift? The new system was introduced without changing the whole legal education system. Law faculties, the mandatory Legal Training Center supervised by the Supreme Court, and the extremely difficult bar examination carried over with only a slight modification. It remains a mystery how the new system of law schools will accommodate these existing systems.

The second mystery is about the guidelines of the admission policy. Based on the recommendation of the Justice System Reform Council of Japan, guidelines for establishing a law school were provided. Several parties, including the Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Education, the Japan Federation of Bar Association, and elite universities, were involved with drafting the guidelines. However, it is unclear by whom and how the guidelines were implemented.

The third mystery is about the admission process. Ryukoku University failed to obtain approval. Ryukoku sought information regarding how and why the decision of disallowance was made. I will describe the obscurity and arbitrariness of the admission process.