Determination of Qualifications for Election Candidates and the Inspection Organization that Legal Decision-Making Authority as Lawful

Abstract

This research article examines the criteria for determining the qualifications of electoral candidates in an election of members of the house of representatives and the role of inspection organizations, and to propose guidelines for improving or establishing appropriate legal measures to enhance efficiency, transparency, and equity. The qualitative research approach was employed using the documentary research and in-depth interview. Data were analyzed using content analysis techniques and comparative analysis of laws of the Federal Republic of Germany, the United Kingdom, and Japan. Findings are as follows: The qualification criteria are excessively stringent and lack flexibility, such as the minimum age requirement of 25 years, ambiguous prohibitions on shareholding in media enterprises, and the blanket disqualification of individuals with prior imprisonment without distinguishing the severity of offenses. The qualification oversight organizations have overlapping and unclear authorities and responsibilities, and the verification process exhibits inconsistencies in the exercise of discretion and timeframes that are not conducive to appeals. When compared with foreign countries, it was found that the Federal Republic of Germany, Japan, and the United Kingdom have more flexible approaches to establishing qualifications and more efficient oversight systems. This research recommends legal reforms emphasizing clarity in terminology definitions, classification of offense severity levels, restructuring oversight organizations to achieve unity, and developing common standard practices, in order to achieve balance between screening qualified candidates and protecting citizens’ political rights, in accordance with the principle of proportionality, the rule of law, and human rights principles.