376
ity, which shall no one violate.’ The meaning of this section has already been stated in brief, that is, the Monarch is the head of the nation and all the people, and he remains in the position that should be free from censure of whatever kind. For such reason, such a principle as this is set out in the constitution of any and every country which is ruled by a monarch and has a constitution. And the term [shinsei] (‘sacred’) in the Japanese constitution has been translated by some venerable translator as sanctity, which is somewhat correct. But if we want it to be quite correct, there should be the word sacro also, in respect of which the Subcommittee has expressed approval. As for the phrase ‘which shall no one violate’, we want it to mean that no one can violate him by subjecting him to a litigation or accusation. If there should be anyone doubting as to what should be done when one suffers injury and cannot institute a litigation against him, we must first think that he is the Head [of State, whose Government is] conventionally called ‘His Majesty’s Government’ [and whose courts, which are known as] ‘His Majesty’s courts’, would try and adjudicate upon cases in his name. Therefore, speaking of the legal principles in some countries, no litigation, whether criminal or civil, can be initiated against him. But it is said that if he has to be responsible for a pecuniary matter, a litigation can be instituted against the Privy Purse Bureau. And the provision thus written would not affect the rights or cause injury to any citizen at all. So, I should like to add the word sacro in front of the word sanctity."
Nai Sa-nguan Tularak said: “The statement ‘divine person’ is too narrow. I want to
