The constitutional relation between the public and the private and public legitimacy : The comparative research of Germany and Japan

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

Under the globalization in the post Cold War world, the notion that a state has sovereignty and develops its society on the basis of the laws enacted by Parliament, has increasingly become outdated. And the fusion of the state and economy under the globalization, the nature of a nation has greatly changed. The boundaries between a "state" and "economy", a "state" and a "society", and the "public" and the "private" have become more uncertain. Therefore, it has become important to decide, among many important public duties, what the nation's duties are, and what can be left to the private organizations or to the individuals' self-determination. It goes without saying that, under the present constitution, this is essentially the problem of the democratic decision by the legislators. However, in the first place, what are the legislators' grounds for the justification of their decisions about such a problem? And, how and to what extent can the constitution regulate private organizations and individuals?This research paper takes into account the arguments on the "legitimacy" and the "public sphere" in Germany and Japan. Then the paper aims to examine, from the viewpoint of national public legitimacy, the constitutional admissibility of the state subsidy to the political party which can be located on the border between a state and a society.