Why Do We Miss the Wood
for the Trees?
A Response from a Nihon-hô Scholar
Makoto Ibusuki
I. Background
Comments
1. Black-letter Law Doctrine, Comparative Law,
and Legal Writing
2. Intuition and Images in Academia
3. Perspectives on Law
4. Academic Evaluation
5. Philosophy of Legal Scholars
II. Exceptions
III. Suggestions
1. Promoting Collaborative Work with Japanese
Scholars
2. Digitalizing Japanese Law Material on the
Internet
3. Creating Independent Academic Groups Based in
Cyberspace
4. Having Trained Law Librarians for Japanese
Law
5. Making Newsletters or Getting Space in a
Commercial Legal
Magazine for Advertising Japanese Law Studies
IV. Conclusion
Some
distinctive aspects in Japanese legal society, particularly in academic
society, appear to be the cause and background for the limited impact of
Japanese law study by foreign scholars. As is common with this type of
observation, however, I should admit that the whole of the description below
depends on my own experiences and simple ideas, not based on any quantitative
data.
In Japan,
many legal articles and materials describing foreign law appear in periodical
indexes monthly. However, in Japanese legal academic society, due to the strong
influence from legal positivism, reference to foreign law has been provided as
mere knowledge for enacting and/or interpreting a law. In Japan, the role of
comparative law is limited to informing about a different legal culture and to
teaching it in classrooms, not to look at our own law and legal system from
another perspective. The reason for such a tendency lies partly in the style
and the concept of a legal thesis in Japanese law faculties. The main interests
of Japanese scholars in legal academia are basically in legal interpretation of
articles in legislation, etc. The authors, such as students in masters and
doctoral courses, need to concentrate on filling out their draft theses by
referring to a lot of foreign materials concerning relevant legal issues.
Comparative legal study in Japan has been developed as one of the tools for
legal interpretation, not as a guide to look at our own law from a broad
perspective. As a result, these authors