vote-value disparity

Last week's Supreme Court decision that the 2017 Lower House election was constitutional should not slow efforts to reduce the nearly 2-to-1 disparity in the value of votes.

Electoral reform should focus on a fundamental solution to the disparity in the value of votes.

The recent changes to the Upper House districts fall far short of addressing in a meaningful way the disparity in vote values.

The bill, jointly submitted by the ruling Liberal Democratic Party and four opposition parties, rectifies sharp gaps in the weight of votes among a number of constituencies.

In enacting electoral reforms, the LDP needs to put voters' constitutional rights ahead of its own interests.

Lawmakers must set aside their partisan interests and act fast to narrow the wide gap in the value of votes between rural and urban constituencies.

A panel of experts has begun discussions on addressing Lower House electoral reforms, particularly the vote-value disparity between rural and urban districts, after talks among the ruling and opposition parties failed.

Lawmakers' personal interests should not be allowed to stand in the way of reforms to reduce the disparity in the value of votes.

It is hoped that incoming new chief Justice Itsuro Terada will stand firm in keeping the Supreme Court independent of political presssures as it considers controversial issues such as the disparity in vote value between legislative constituencies and whether Japan may exercise its right ...

Talks between the ruling and opposition parties on rectifying vote-value disparity, which remains so wide among Lower House constituencies as to undermine the principle of equality under the Constitution, have made little headway.

The disparity in vote value between more and less populous Upper House constituencies has grown so wide that it is undermining the principle of equality under the law with regard to the representation of voters's will.