The title of the June 10 article "Laws, legal terms get official translation" is misleading. As shown on the Web site in question and indeed on the predecessor site: "These are unofficial translations. Only the original Japanese texts of the laws and regulations have legal effect, and the translations are to be used solely as reference material to aid in the understanding of Japanese laws and regulations."
That's hardly surprising. Having interpreted for some U.K.-Japan treaty negotiations, I know that it can take years to agree on wording that is accepted as equally valid in two languages — even for one comparatively short document, let alone hundreds of laws. Moreover, by allowing any such translations to become "official," Japan would be laying itself open to countless arguments regarding linguistic and legal interpretation, let alone debate over the status of English in Japan vs. that of other languages.
The idea is good and the site is useful. It goes some way to alleviating confusion if, for example, one person says "Aviation Law" while another says "Civil Aeronautics Act." It will save translators the trouble of reinventing the wheel. Yet some parts have obviously been translated by machine and that system is not very clever. Note for example numerous dates transcribed in the manner of "5 month 2008 year" — evidently 2008-nen 5-gatsu, or May 2008. Even translate.google can do better than that.
Was it coincidence that the site was launched on April 1?