震災と法的支援－公法的側面から－

The outline of this paper is as follows. The contents are limited to the Great East Japan Earthquake of 3.11, and the public laws support for it. And it explains about the Basic Act on Reconstruction in response to the Great East Japan Earthquake which can be said to be the public law, and the Act on Special Zone for Reconstruction and the Act on Establishment ofthe Reconstruction Agency which are enacted in response to the Basic Act. Also, it examines the problems of these laws. The Basic Act on Reconstruction in response to the Great East JapanEarthquake aims prompt reconstruction from the Great East Earthquake and revitalization of vibrant Japan, and it orders that central government, local self-governing bodies, and people should be united, and should reconstruction. In order to accomplish the aim, it provides issuance of Reconstruction Bonds, creation of system of Special Zone for Reconstruction, and establishment of Reconstruction Agency, and other things. The Act on Special Zone for Reconstruction was enacted in response to the article 10 of the Basic Act on Reconstruction. This act aims reconstruction byspecial case of regulations and procedures, and the special case on a taxation system and finance in local self-governing bodies which suffered damage from the Great East Japan Earthquake. Also, the Act on Establishmentof the Reconstruction Agency, and Reconstruction Agency placed under the Cabinet and performs the business of the Reconstruction. The problems are as follows. (1) Delay of enactment of the Basic Act, (2) basic philosophy of the Basic Act, (3) relation between central government and local governments, (4) relation between central and local governments and the people who suffered the Great Earthquake, (5) relation to the Neo-liberal structural reforms, and (6) others. 　(1) It took the three months before the Basic Act enacted. In the case of the Great Hanshin Earthquake, it was one month after the Great Hanshin Earthquake that the Basic Policy Act on the Reconstruction from the Great Hanshin Earthquake (1995) enacted. As compared with that, it is clear that legislation was overdue this time. Although there is some of the reason,it is one of the big causes that the trouble involving introduction of the no- confidence motion to the Kan Administration, etc. were just before enactment of law. 　(2) The Basic Act set forth the philosophy that “revitalization of vibrant Japan” and specifies the purposes for “subjects common to human beings”, such as “reduction of low birthrate and longevity and population”, a "food problem”, and a “global warming Issue.” But these purposes and disaster victims' life reconstruction do not have direct relevance. So, it is ambiguous about the Reconstruction for what and for whom. 　(3) & (4) I pointed out that the systems possibly made not for the disaster victims but for the central government. 　(5) The Special Zone for Reconstruction corresponds with “neo-liberal reform” promoted under the Liberal Democratic Party Administration. So, it may be not for the disaster victims but for the government. 　(6) I pointed out the problems reported in the newspapers (the weakness of the authority of the Reconstruction Agency, and so on).