权益分类	功能权益	普通用户	{{item.name}}会员
{{category.name}}	{{benefitItem.name}}

A International Comparative Study into The Voting and Electoral Code of Disabled

残疾人投票和选举守则的国际比较研究

基本信息

批准号：
14510249
负责人：
YAMADA Kenji
金额：
$ 1.79万
依托单位：
Gumma Shorei Junior College of Welfare
依托单位国家：
日本
项目类别：
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (C)
财政年份：
2002
资助国家：
日本
起止时间：
2002 至 2003
项目状态：
已结题

来源：
https://kaken.nii.ac.jp/grant/KAKENHI-PROJECT-14510249/
关键词：
voting Disabled Aged Society Electoral Code environment of election 選挙権投票権人権在宅投票

项目摘要

1/.The present regulations of the Public Electoral Office in Japan prevent people with special needs from exercising their right to vote. The current regulations exist to stop a repeat of the rigged local election that occurred in 1951. However, the present rules concerning voting were not developed with people with special needs in mind but rather to stop bad elections. This has resulted in the infringement of the elector's right to vote and hence violates the constitution. Even with the introduction of the postal voting system and improvements, the violation still exists 70 years later. 2/.Over 50% of participants in this study did not vote. The reasons for this were (a) bad health and (b) mobility difficulties. None of the reasons were related to disability. Mobility difficulty did not correlate directly with walking and helped to explain the success of moving the polling stations on voting day. When considering the voting behavior, disability was not a barrier, rather, environmental factors were. As such, to consider that voting from home is due to mobility problems of the elder is wrong. 3/.It is clear that disability dose not correlate with the reason why people did not vote, but rather, as in the Holland, their will to vote. In Sweden, voting from home is set up as a part of the National system under the absentee voting section. The rate of voting has increased due to improvements in the voting environment that is in line with national policy.

1 /。日本现行的选举厅条例阻碍了有特殊需要的人行使选举权。现行规定是为了防止1951年地方选举舞弊事件的重演。但是，目前关于投票的规则并没有考虑到有特殊需要的人，而是为了制止糟糕的选举。这就侵犯了选举人的选举权，因而违反了宪法。即使引入了邮政投票系统并进行了改进，70年后，这种违规行为仍然存在。2 /。在这项研究中，超过50%的参与者没有投票。造成这种情况的原因是(a)健康状况不佳和(b)行动不便。这些原因都与残疾无关。行动困难与步行没有直接关系，这有助于解释投票日移动投票站的成功。在考虑投票行为时，残疾不是障碍，环境因素才是。因此，认为在家投票是因为老年人的行动不便是错误的。3 /。很明显，残疾与人们不投票的原因无关，而是与他们投票的意愿有关，就像在荷兰一样。在瑞典，在家投票是国家制度的一部分，在缺席投票部分。由于投票环境的改善符合国家政策，投票率有所提高。