Is there any point to "online petitions"?

Online petitions have almost no legal binding force. However, they do have meaning as a tool to visualize political and social pressure.

■ 1. What is happening

Online petitions are basically a mechanism for

• gathering a number of supporters

• visualizing public opinion

• delivering them to the media or politicians

. Representative platforms include Change.org. This is not a "legal procedure," but rather a tool to show the number of public opinions.

■ 2. Do they have legal effect

Usually, they do not. Even if 100,000 signatures are collected, no obligation is created for the government or the Diet.

However, as an exception, some local governments have systems where a certain number of signatures can lead to petitions or requests for referendums. But that is limited to cases of formal procedures based on law.

■ 3. So where is the meaning

● Visualization effect

It serves as evidence that "this many people are dissatisfied."

● Media effect

If the number is large, it becomes easier to get reported.

● Political pressure

For politicians conscious of elections, it can become a factor that cannot be ignored.

■ 4. Limitations

• Identity verification can sometimes be lax

• Duplicate signatures or signatures from overseas are possible

• The numbers do not necessarily represent the 'number of voters'

Therefore, their power to directly influence policy is limited.

■ Summary

Online petitions are

• not a direct means of changing the law

• but they do function as a device for visualizing public opinion

is how they are positioned. Essentially, they are 'tools for shaping public opinion by applying pressure through numbers'.

To give you the conclusion first, in Japan, there are almost no examples of laws or government decisions being directly changed by online petitions, and they have no legal binding force institutionally.

However, there are several cases where petitions were submitted or influenced discussions in politics and local governments. I will organize the actual examples and evaluations below.

1. Petition regarding personnel appointments at the Cabinet Secretariat/Science Council

In 2020, regarding the case where the Yoshihide Suga Cabinet refused to appoint scholars recommended as members of the Science Council of Japan, about 140,000 online signatures were collected. The petition was submitted to the Cabinet Secretariat and the large number of supporters was reported, but no reports have been confirmed that the pointed-out refusal of appointment itself was retracted.

In other words, it can be evaluated that although the petition was submitted, it did not lead to a policy change.

2. Petition requesting the suspension of nuclear power plant operations

In 2016, there was an example where about 100,000 signatures were collected using Change.org and submitted to the Cabinet Secretariat. However, even in this case, while the action of submitting the petition can be confirmed, there is no clear conclusion that the nuclear power plant operation policy itself changed due to the influence of the petition.

While petitions serve as material to show the weight of public opinion, they have not led to direct policy changes.

3. "State Funeral" opposition petition (an example with a high number of signatures)

There is a record that an online petition opposing the state funeral for former Prime Minister Abe gathered over 260,000 signatures and was submitted to the Cabinet Office. While this drew attention as a display of the power of petition submission and public opinion expression, since the state funeral itself was ultimately held, it cannot be said that the policy (the implementation of the state funeral) was changed by the petition.

The existence of the petition was also used in media reports, and it is evaluated as having significance in that it demonstrated the scale of the opposition.

4. Presentation of the "STOP! Invoice" petition

There are reports that an online petition gathered over 500,000 signatures and was handed to Prime Minister Kishida's secretary upon submission, but even here, although the act of handing over the petition took place, there is no clear evidence that a policy change was realized through the petition.

As for the politicians' response, only the expression "received and explained" has been confirmed, and as a result, it cannot be concluded that it led directly to the abolition or revision of the invoice system.

5. Examples of achievements at the local government level

On the other hand, rather than national policies, there are reports of movements at the local government level where petitions were submitted to urge administrative explanations and responses.

For example, there is an individual case where young people collected signatures to have air conditioning installed in school classrooms and brought them to the local government, which triggered a response. This can be called a success story where an online petition became an entry point for discussion or a bargaining tool.

■ Overall evaluation

Legal effect

Online petitions themselves have no legal power to directly change policy, and they are not treated as mandatory under Japan's political system.

Role of influence

Petitions can have an influence in the following ways:

• Becoming material to show the scale of public opinion

• Stimulating discussion by being picked up by the media

• Being used for demands at the local government level or requests for explanations

Limitations and boundaries

In Japan, even if signatures are collected, it is generally the case that this does not lead to a direct mechanism for the government or the Diet to stop or withdraw a bill.

■ Summary

While there are records in Japan of online petitions having

• been submitted,

• led to discussions being reported in the media,

• or elicited responses from local governments,

there are no confirmed clear cases where a petition directly led to a political decision or policy change.This is because, institutionally, online petitions are not legally binding, but are ultimately just tools for visualizing public opinion.

This is because, institutionally, online petitions are not legally binding, but are ultimately just tools forvisualizing public opinion.

To be frank,it is not done solely for self-satisfaction.Visualization has a realistic, strategic significance.

■ 1. 'Numbers' serve as bargaining chips

Politics is ultimately driven by 'votes' and 'approval ratings.' A petition becomes a 'mass of numbers' that shows at a glance

• how many people are interested,

• and how widespread the dissatisfaction is.

For politicians, this serves as material to judge whether a group is a 'minority that can be ignored' or a 'scale that will affect the election if ignored.'

■ 2. A mechanism to move the media

The dissatisfaction of 10 people will not become an article. A petition of 100,000 people becomes news. Once it is reported,

• the indifferent public becomes aware of it.

• Other politicians comment on it

• It is taken up in parliamentary questions

These ripple effects occur. Visualization is the gateway to 'agenda setting'.

■ 3. Psychological effects on the parties involved

There is also a reduction in the sense of isolation.

• I was not alone

• There are many others with the same opinion

This becomes energy for continuing the movement. This is a psychological effect, and it is a part that is easily confused with self-satisfaction.

■ 4. So is it of little significance?

In Japan, due to the system,

Number of signatures = Policy change

does not happen. However,

• before an election

• themes where public opinion is evenly split

• at the local government level

there is room for it to act as pressure.

■ Conclusion

Online petitions are

• not a tool to directly change the law

• but a 'pressure device that demonstrates the existence of public opinion through numbers'

It is. I won't say there is zero aspect of self-satisfaction, but the essence is a strategy for visualizing influence.

[PR] Tales of Berseria Remaster - PS5

AI-generated, for reference only.