|
|
Post by observer on Nov 30, 2011 23:01:33 GMT
Prince Akishino has raised the question of a retirement age for Japanese emperors. Successive Japanese governments have attempted to raise the official retirement age from 60 but many keep working till much later. Many large firms, however, compel people to retire at age 65 (actually, at the end of the labor year in which they turn 65). Although people can begin receiving their welfare pensiont at age 60 (if they have paid in for the requisite number of years), the Government is beginning to raise that age - to 61 in 2013. In part, this is because of Japan's large baby boomer generation, and in part because of the longevity of Japanese - Japan has the world's largest centenarian population.
In the emperor's case, I imagine there would have to be both a change in the Imperial House Law allow emperors to retire, and a special law to provide a retired emperor with a pension - I don't think the imperial family pays into the state fund.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cinderella on Dec 1, 2011 20:03:01 GMT
It does seem as if he should have the right to retire after a certain age. Maybe then it could be left up to the individual emperor to decide whether to keep working.
|
|
|
|
Post by observer on Dec 1, 2011 22:46:40 GMT
It does seem as if he should have the right to retire after a certain age. Maybe then it could be left up to the individual emperor to decide whether to keep working. The Imperial Family are essentially prisoners of the 1947 Imperial House Law and of the American-inspired 1947 Constitution. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no provision in either for retirement, i.e., abdication. Like the British situation, the emperor is the emperor, whether he likes it or not, because that is what the law says he is. |
|
hovite
Member of the Court
Posts: 40
|
Post by hovite on Dec 16, 2011 10:13:47 GMT
The Imperial Family are essentially prisoners of the 1947 Imperial House Law and of the American-inspired 1947 Constitution. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no provision in either for retirement, i.e., abdication. Like the British situation, the emperor is the emperor, whether he likes it or not, because that is what the law says he is. That is indeed the current law, but in the past English kings were able to retire: Caedwalla, King of Wessex, abdicated in 688, and went to Rome, where he was baptized. Ethelred, King of Mercia, abdicated in 704. Offa, King of Essex, abdicated in 709 and retired to Rome. Ine, King of Wessex, abdicated and retired to Rome in 726. Sigeric, King of Essex, abdicated in 798 and retired to Rome. |
|
|
|
Post by observer on Dec 16, 2011 23:40:48 GMT
The Imperial Family are essentially prisoners of the 1947 Imperial House Law and of the American-inspired 1947 Constitution. There is, to the best of my knowledge, no provision in either for retirement, i.e., abdication. Like the British situation, the emperor is the emperor, whether he likes it or not, because that is what the law says he is. That is indeed the current law, but in the past English kings were able to retire: Caedwalla, King of Wessex, abdicated in 688, and went to Rome, where he was baptized. Ethelred, King of Mercia, abdicated in 704. Offa, King of Essex, abdicated in 709 and retired to Rome. Ine, King of Wessex, abdicated and retired to Rome in 726. Sigeric, King of Essex, abdicated in 798 and retired to Rome. If your post, Hovite, refers to the current British situation, then I agree that abdication was something possible to regional English kings more than 1000 years ago. But they were regional kings, not national kings, and certainly not monarchs of several different independent realms simulteneously. I do know that many medieval and Dark Age Scots kings also abdciated for one reason or another. In those times, however, kings were not bound by laws and constitutions in the same manner as modern ones. When the religious aspect of the Japanese emperor system was dominant, Japanese emperors routinely abdicated, retired into a pampered existence and wielded considerable power behind the throne. The last emperor to do so, however, was Emperor Koukaku, who was born in 1771, reigned from 1780 to 1817, and died in 1840. So it is almost 200 years since a Japanese emperor abdicated. Moreover, as I said in my earlier posting, the current laws do not envisage the possibility of an emperor abdicating. |
|
|
|
Post by HRISMH Duke Rico on Dec 29, 2011 0:24:17 GMT
Does Japan have anything like a regency system that the western monarchies do?
|
|
|
|
Post by observer on Dec 30, 2011 3:56:39 GMT
Does Japan have anything like a regency system that the western monarchies do? Article 5 of the Japanese Constitutions allows for the establishment of a regency in accordance with the Imperial House Law. Article 16 of the Imperial House Law states that a regency is established when the emperor is a minor, or when the emperor "is afflicted with a serious disease, mental or physical, or there is a serious hindrance, and he is unable to perform his acts in matters of State." I doubt if simply getting older fits the latter provision, however, |
|
